The HDB Flat & the Price of Progress

You would have read about the latest HDB resale price by now. S$900,000.

S$170,000 cash premium for Bishan maisonette a unique case: analysts

Amongst Singaporeans, 80% to 90% of us stay in HDB flats. Of course most aspire to move to private housing, but the reality is that 2 forces are suppressing our ability to do so. These are:

• Wages
• Price of private housing - The most affordable private apartments with 2 bedrooms start at S$1mil these days. 

Both Wages and Prices of private housing are directly affected by inflow of foreign labour/talent, depending on the income you are in. The middle class Singaporean likes to believe that the foreign labour/talent issue only affects the very low-waged and the very high-waged, and does not affect him. He cannot be more wrong. These days, as long as the foreigner makes S$2,500, he is a foreign talent. Competition is at ALL income levels.

While our real wages get lower and private property prices shoot for the sky and beyond, we still need a roof over our heads.

So, if we are unable to buy private housing anymore, are we able to afford a HDB flat comfortably? Let's use a few of critical points to test the HDB flat system.

The Buyers

We like to complain as a whole. But who are the people making up 'we'?

For this test, 3 typical HDB buyer types are used:

• the Young Couple - We reckon this is their first time buying a HDB flat, and they bring home a combined gross monthly income of S$3,800.
• the Median Singaporean family - This is that family whose income is right in the middle amongst all Singaporean families. As highlighted in the Golden Years Bill entry, this very average Singaporean family makes ends meet with S$4,850 per month. 
• the Income Ceiling family - If your combined household income goes beyond S$8,000 per month, HDB will not allow you to purchase a brand new  HDB flat. Hence, this is an important group of families to look at.

The HDB Flat

A HDB Flat is a piece of real estate. And 2 factors affect the price of real estate significantly, i.e. location and size.

Hence, for the purpose of comparison, we use the most popular HDB configuration, i.e. the 4-room HDB flat, and find out how much a 4-room flat costs in different parts of Singapore. Starting from the cheapest area, i.e. Jurong West, moving to Punggol (where a lot of supply is), including a semi-matured estate such as Bukit Batok, and a fully matured estate such as Toa Payoh. Of course, we have also included the iconically expensive Pinnacle@Duxton to stretch our HDB dwellers' dollar a little.

We then compare the figures for Brand New flats and Resale Flats in these areas for the 4-room flat, and against the incomes of the 3 buyer types.

The Test

It seems HDB has got it all sorted out. At least for now.

The Young Couple (S$3,850)
Assuming you are a sane young couple, i.e. spending a prudent maximum of 30% of your gross monthly household income (mHHI) on paying your flat's installments, your options are limited to (i) Brand New HDB Flats (ii) in cheaper areas such as Jurong West and Punggol. No need to fantasize about semi-matured estate as there are limited or no new HDB flats. As for flats in mature estates and/or iconic HDB pieces, you can pinch yourself to wake up now.

HDB seems to have realised this situation recently. It increased the amount of additional grant a first-time couple can receive. The grant is on a sliding scale, i.e. if you make more (up to S$5,000), you get less. See grants here.

However, for our Young couple, the grant does not improve their consumption power significantly because they are already stuck in the lowest rung. In other words, the grant is not gonna miraculously help them to afford a flat in Toa Payoh.

The Median Family (S$4,850)
The Median Family, though making around 25% more, is not doing much better than the Young Couple either. If it qualifies, it can buy the same cheap Brand New flats like the Young Couple can. If it doesn't qualify for Brand New flats, it is limited to only resale flats in the cheapest area such as Jurong West. It cannot even afford the resale flats in Punggol prudently.

Remember, the Median Family is at the top of the bottom 50% of all Singaporean families. If it can't prudently afford a Brand New flat outside of Jurong West and Punggol, it means half of Singaporean families cannot either.

The Income Ceiling Family (S$8,000)
This family has it much better. HDB fixes all the prices of its Brand New Flat such that this family can afford them. At S$8,000 per month, this family can even afford resale flats in all areas. Sounds good, doesn't it? I don't have the figures... but at S$8,000 per month, this family is probably at the 75%-80% percentile of all Singaporean mHHi.

However, trouble is also looming for the S$8,000 per month family, because it is beginning to feel the limits of its consumption power. For example, it cannot comfortably afford the upper end of Brand New Pinnacle@Duxton as long as they are priced above S$500k. Neither can it afford the new high prices of resale flats. Refer to the columns marked 'X' in the table.

Implications Gleaned from this Test

So what does this test tell us?

(1) 50% of Singaporean families cannot prudently afford a Brand New HDB flat in most locations, unless they have a stash of cash or existing asset, e.g. from inheritance.

(2) Barring those with stash of cash/existing asset, families who fall below the median mHHI of S$4,850 but yet have recently bought a flat in better areas, are spending more than 30% of their gross income on housing alone.

These families are compromising on other aspects of their lives. In the short run, these other aspects may appear to be the inability to afford a car or a holiday. But in the long run, these compromises may add up to the inability to afford elder care for their parents and themselves, and/or that chance to pursue an overseas degree if the children are unable to qualify for local universities.

(3) Even with government grants, it is virtually impossible for young couples to be staying outside of the cheapest HDB estates without extra help.

This of course adds to the delay in family formation, as the young couple puts off the expensive marriage and home purchase. In an economy where wages are not growing as fast as property prices, these young couples will find themselves climbing an escalator that is sliding downwards.

(4) Within the HDB construct, the household incomes and HDB prices can still be matched. Hence SINGOV can announce without blinking that HDB Flats are still affordable.

However, something is lost in the process and unreported.
What's lost is CHOICE and ASPIRATION.

Should the income ceiling for HDB flay buyers not be increased, even the HDB flat buyers in the top salary bands will have to start suppressing their desires for the 'better' flats.

Are Choice and Aspiration a luxury for at least 75% of Singaporean families?

To answer this question, we have to take things into context.

If our country is 3rd world or developing, it will be common to observe significant groups of people experiencing lack of choice/aspiration, and/or even live in poverty.

However, if our country is enjoying one of the highest GDP per capita in the world, yet 75% of its people/families have to accept reduced choices and aspirations, then something is not right with the wealth distribution mechanism.

If we don't meet most of our people's aspirations, we are not progressing as one Singapore anymore. What good is a nation full of people with unmet aspirations? Is it true that their aspirations are unmet because these people have unrealistic aspirations?

This is not simply right.

Poor Steve

Overheard...

"If Steve Jobs were a civil servant, do you think he would make it through to the Administrative Service?"

Officer A: No lah... You cannot compare Steve Jobs to Administrative Officers. Steve Jobs has different strengths.

Officer B: Steve Jobs will not even make it as a normal officer in the civil service lor! He will be transferred to some IT department and left there to rot. Then people will go,"That one... That one... Very difficult to work with... Lack helicopter view la!"

Officer C: Yah! Gossip behind his back and say things like,"That one ah... Maverick... Maverick... CEP low la... *snigger*"

Officer B: Then at a meeting, some big boss will openly pass comment to Jobs,"So Steve... Still around ah har? So... What's new? Any latest gadget? *snigger + awkward laughter from the rest in the room*"

Your Expensive Golden Years Bill

Which is more expensive? 

(1) The senior person's stroke/cancer/heart bypass treatment in the hospital, OR
(2) Taking care of the elderly after the hospital treatment

Insurance only covers (1), and not (2). Go figure.

How much does it cost to take care of an elderly who requires constant medical and sustenance attention? 

This means the elderly is unable to take baths on his own, needs to be fed, receive medical attention regularly etc.

After looking at some figures, I figured that it would cost S$4,000 to $5,000 per month. This includes a bed in an open ward, food, and medical care. No frills. So, if you have 1 elderly in this condition for 1 year, it would cost the family S$60,000 per year. By the 5th year, it would have been as much as the price of a HDB flat, i.e. S$300,000.

What is the median household income in Singapore now? 

S$4,850

It's quite clear that the average Singaporean family cannot support an elderly who requires such care on its own, without significantly compromising the quality of life for the other family members.

So, what do average Singaporean families do when such a situation happens? 

First and foremost, they would try to 'cope' with it. That usually means keeping the elderly at home, and having someone in the family to help to take care of him full-time or part-time. These individuals are known as 'care-givers'. As the senior's health deteriorates, he is shuttled to and fro the hospital and home.

Then when it's clear that the family is unable to cope without jeopardising the fragile condition of the elderly, he is checked into a hospice or nursing home. Meanwhile, there is a huge build-up of guilt, anguish and fatigue.

These families do not always pay the full amount of S$5,000 per month for the hospice stay. It depends on their income brackets. 

If the family is not paying in full, who is picking up the bill now? 

The donations secured by these hospices and/or their parent charity organisations. The government subsidises part of the bill. The families may end up paying a few hundred to a couple of thousand of dollars per month.

As long as donors and government are picking up the tab, we should be ok, right?

But this is not a sustainable solution, because:

• The number of elders requiring such a care level is increasing.
• There are limited number of beds which these hospices and charity organisations can supply. In other words, there aren't enough of such service providers around.
• There are also clear shortages of healthcare workers, especially those interested in taking care of the elderly. These include doctors, nurses, therapists, counsellors, social workers etc. 
• And in such a situation of limited supply, the cost of elderly care will become even higher. 

How do families in other developed countries cope with this?

In the US, the elderly care industry is highly developed.

As an elderly, you can choose to stay at home (with or without your family) and opt for a package where someone would come to your home to take care of you. This could cost you a few thousand US dollars a month.

Or you could choose to move into a community home, where you will have your own room or apartment, and can opt for medical care, food, laundry etc. So, you can sell your house and move into one of these communities, paying US$5k to US$10k per month (depending on frills or no frills). Till you finish the journey.

Why isn't the average Singaporean elderly doing the same?

1. There are little or no such services available in Singapore. Remember Minister Khaw once suggested for our elders to retire in JB to many's displeasure? He wasn't saying it for fun, or to murder his political career. He and his officers in Ministry of Health and probably MCYS know how big the elder care bill is. But whoever wrote his speech was really unskilled in getting such a sensitive message across.
2. He can't afford it. Even if there were such services available in Singapore, the average Singaporean senior's wealth is locked up in the HDB flat, which may still house his children and grandchildren. The flat cannot be sold in exchange for elderly care services. 
3. He doesn't want to do it. Even if the services were available and that he could afford it, the Singaporean elderly wants to stay on his own or with his family. He does not want to move into a home. He feels that there is a stigma.

Please! If this was really such a huge problem, it would have already been taken care of. So, this can't be such a huge problem, right?

Wrong. This is a fucking stressful issue for all involved, i.e. from the elderly person, to his family, to the maid hired to act as his personal nurse, to the current hospice providers/staff etc. Most people don't talk about it, because it's sensitive. E.g. You don't wanna complain/talk to a friend about the difficulties you are facing as a care-giver for your mother because you don't wanna come across as unfilial.

And this is a problem which is right at our doorstep. It's not like it'll only be due in a few decades like how Saving Our Earth has been pitched to us since we were kids. No. This issue is right before our noses, staring at us.

If you really need to know the total figure, the total bill (taking into account the CURRENT number of seniors = 350,900, assume 5% (stroke/cancer/accidents) + 5% (dementia) will require such care for the last 5 years of their lives) comes up to be more than S$10.5BILLION. That's like 6% of our current GDP.

In 20 years, the seniors population will be at 900,000 or 1 out of 5. Imagine the elder care bill then, and who would be bearing the load of this bill.

And this is a lowest cost + conservative estimate with limited overview of population, aging/morbidity trends etc. Only the government has a good overview.

What can we do about it?

There are 3 ways to go about mitigating this elder care problem:

 (1) Prevention of Demand
"Healthy Living! Active Aging!"
The terrible pressure of elder care explains why SINGOV is always promoting healthy living and active aging. It has even announced a SGD100Million budget to 'support seniors.

However, this S$100mil budget is not to directly subsidise elder care, i.e. not used to fill the bottomless pit. Instead, the money is spent on prevention of a bottomless pit and promotion of healthy living and active aging. While S$100M sounds like a lot of money, but take a closer look and you'll realise that it is nothing compared to S$10B.

SGD100mil = Wellness Programme (SGD77mil) + Promotion of Active Ageing (SGD20mil) + Centre of Enabled Living (SGD3mil)

(2) Catering to Demand
This includes ensuring that (i) people have enough money for old age, (ii) there are enough elder care service providers, and (iii) improve awareness and image of using such services.

And if the elder care industry in Singapore just doesn't take off sufficiently, I believe, allowing for your CPF to be used in Malaysian hospitals is a supplementary step.

Why SINGOV has not actively dangle 'seed money' to grow the elder care industry, I do not know. Perhaps because the problem is too acute.

Or perhaps, SINGOV is acutely aware that even if there are service providers, the average Singaporean families cannot afford to pay for their services.

In addition, SINGOV ensures that if you cannot pay for your old age, your kids will HAVE to pay for you, i.e. Maintenance of Parents' Act. This Act has been tightened once again recently. In effect, SINGOV is preventing the family unit from passing further burden to the state. Though this may not sound like much for you (my readers), imagine the burden on the average Singaporean family with a household income of S$4,850 per month, trying to support a bed-ridden senior at the cost of up to S$5,000 per month.

(3) Reducing Demand
We are all gonna live longer. But longer lives may not mean quality lives for some of us. Towards the end, some of us will be suffering and demanding for medical care and attention over sustained periods.

One clearcut way is to allow for assisted suicide. Such sensitive topics do not make their way to mainstream media for no purpose. I personally believe this is a reasonable way out for all involved, especially the suffering senior and his family.

The Labour/Talent Story - Continued

Competition at Non-White-Collar Level

When I used to work at China Jump as a waitress/host during my uni days, the waiting, bussing and bartending crews were made up of Singaporeans (full-time and part-time), with the exception of a couple of Malaysians. Some staff were veteran waiters and bartenders, i.e. they had been working in major restaurants for years, and were experienced in interacting with customers, cross/up-selling and taking orders. It was their profession. They had flair. They knew the tricks of the trade. Their career progression would be to move towards the floor/bar manager role, and in due time, they could take charge of the restaurant/bar or a few restaurants/bars.

A few doors away, the staff profile at Bobby Rubino's was the same, and at that pub (I forget the name) too etc. Of course, the quiet hardworking guy who washed the dishes in the kitchen at the back was always from Bangladesh. That was in the late 1990s.

Today, step into any restaurant, you are likely to hear Filipino or PRC accents. Is it true that this is a result of Singaporeans being picky? Does this mean that a few years after the late 90s, all my China Jump friends stopped wanting to work in this line? That they gave up their years of prior restaurant/service experience and career paths because 'Singaporeans don't want such jobs' anymore?

SINGOV tells us that it has no choice but to import skilled foreigners to fill in these service positions, e.g. import experienced waitresses from the Philippines. And in recent years, they had to step up the rate because the economy had been growing very fast.

Yesterday, we went to a 1-year old ramen restaurant owned by a Singaporean restaurant chain. It looked nicely Japanese. The waitress spoke with a Filipino accent. After some interaction, we realised that she couldn't answer our questions, and that she was 2-weeks old in the restaurant. In gist, she is an UNSKILLED foreign worker in Singapore.

Of course, the floor manager of that restaurant was Singaporean. He had probably gained his food & beverage skills by working up the ranks in the late 1990s. But if the current waiting, bussing, bartending positions are mostly taken up by foreigners. In time to come, the floor/bar manager jobs then the restaurant manager jobs would have to be filled by experienced foreigners, and not by inexperienced Singaporeans.

In the process, Singaporeans are edged out, regardless whether they were really disinterested in such jobs in the first place. Once time is lost, this is not an easy process to reverse.


Competition at Super White-Collar Level

Another crazy phenomenon I have observed.
You have read about how SINGOV claims Singapore does not produce enough 'talents' for jobs in the other end of the spectrum, i.e. the top while collar jobs. And so, they also had no choice but to bring in foreigners aka Foreign Talents (FTs), who are supposedly better than us.

What's strange is this: Every year, the Singapore Civil Service gives out hundreds of scholarships to talented 18 year old Singaporeans, for them to be trained in the best universities abroad. They are trained in a huge variety of areas, e.g. Economics, Physics, Mathematics, Engineering, Law etc. Most of them top their university class, i.e. they are considered as one of the best in the world. Then they return to serve their bonds with SINGOV. The bond used to be 8 years, now it's 6. A female 'scholar' starts serving her bond at age 21/22, and will remain bonded to SINGOV till she's around 27/28. Male scholars serve their bonds at age 23/24 and will remain bonded till he's around 29/30.

Most scholars want to get into the Administrative Service, i.e. the elite talent management scheme in SINGOV, because it means they'll get the chance to compete for the top civil service positions, e.g. becoming the Permanent Secretary. Of course, the pay is extremely attractive. So, the current system is such that a returning scholar is placed on the Management Associate (MA) Scheme automatically upon return. Within 4 years (2 postings in 2 Ministries), he will know if he's been selected from the MAs to join the Administrative Service. As mentioned earlier, if he is selected to join the Administrative Service, his career path is extended and paved with gold (e.g. top Administrative Officer by age 32 can make SGD300k per annum).

Sounds good eh? HOOT AH!!! Go for it!!!

HOWEVER, if he is NOT selected to join the Administrative Service by the 4th year, he will be 'absorbed' by one of the ministries. His career path becomes that of a normal officer at the age of 28 with roughly 2-3 promotions to go (to Director-level) for the next 30+ years.

At 28, this unchosen scholar would have 2 more years of bond to serve. Of course, if he has the resources, he may choose to break his bond, i.e. buy up the rest of his bond + interest, then go work elsewhere. And so, the Civil Service attempts to retain these unchosen scholars with sort of a consolation prize called the High Potential Scheme, i.e. give them a lump sum of money annually till they hit a certain senior grade (i.e. unlikely to have similar market value), promise them lateral movement, and involving them in 'interesting' but adhoc projects.

Meanwhile, these unchosen scholars hear from their Ivy League/Oxbridge classmates who had graduated at the same time as they did 4 years ago. Some with grades not as brilliant as theirs. These classmates are now hired by the private sector and working in London, New York, Sydney, Hong Kong, Shanghai etc. Having joined big financial institutions, management consultancies, large MNCs...

And by the 6th year, these private sector classmates would have risen considerably in their respective fields, and some have even come to Singapore as Foreign Talents on expat packages.

(We are only talking about scholarships given out by the Civil Service (aka Ministries), and not even counting scholars under Statutory Boards such as ASTAR, LTA, URA etc, who may have studied in the same course/uni and graduated with the same top honours as their Civil Service counterparts.)

What's wasteful here?

SINGOV creates the rights over a basket of local talents for its own talent selection process and needs. To arrive at that basket of around 200 Administrative Officers, SINGOV goes through an even larger basket of scholars annually. Even when some of these scholars are deemed unsuitable for SINGOV's purpose at an early stage, they are 'stored' in SINGOV through the prime years of their careers. While some of these unchosen scholars choose for themselves to remain in the system for life, others eventually make their way out into the private sector. It is unclear how successful they are in the private sector. Some have gone overseas to seek better opportunities.

Here comes the conundrum...

Meanwhile, SINGOV claims that Singapore does not have enough local talents, and so, we have to import Foreign Talent. And like the waitress situation, SINGOV had to step up the inflow of Foreign Talent because the economy is booming. And so, some of these scholars' classmates are now in Singapore as expats (foreign talents), while the unchosen scholars struggle with the question of whether there are jobs for them in the private sector.

You must remember that these unchosen scholars are still the cream of Singapore. They topped the A Levels. They topped the best universities around the world. And there is more than just a handful of them.

And for normal talents like you and me, we suffer fates similar to my China Jump waitress/bartender friends. We are also replaced by foreign 'normal' talents. (Yes, the foreign talent we let in is not limited to top top top talent only.) Our big bosses are foreign talent too. If we do not get the opportunity to build up our careers, we are nothing in years to come.

A solid career is not just for shioks/ego, though self actualisation is very important. Minimally, a solid career will help to pay the bills. Don't get me started on the cost of your old age and that of supporting your folks' final years. The cost figures are very scary, even though SINGOV does not make these explicit. Let's deal with this in another blog entry...


WHAT SHOULD BE DONE?

The point of this entry is NOT to claim that:

• Importing foreign talent and labour is BAD.
  
• Singaporeans can fill ALL the jobs in our economy
  

BUT, we must all realise that the supply of international labour and talent is infinite relative to the jobs our economy can offer. We are killing our people's careers by subjecting our people to such unnecessary competition. No other developed country does this to its people.

It is the prerogative of Singaporeans to demand:

• For SINGAPOREANS to be considered FIRST for ANY position.
• For SINGOV to study and limit/cut-off inflow of foreign labour/talent for positions/industries which Singaporeans wish to take up.
  

Other developed governments do this for their people, I don't see why we should not want this.

Don't tell us this will make Singapore less attractive to MNCs/FTs, because we know for sure that Singapore is Asia's Top Expat Destination. And we know how not-so-well the Western economies are coping these days. Expats are dying to work, live, play and raise their children in Singapore, so we definitely have the upper hand to choose the best from this ample Expats supply to work for us.

Singapore may not have had any bargaining chips to avoid pimping ourselves to the world earlier. But this is not the case now. This is the best time to house-keep our Labour/Talent situation.

James Sun & Sun Tzu: War on Business

Perhaps I am the only person in Singapore who watches that much TV and blogs about it.

Regardless... Let's begin...

Have you seen the trailer or any episode of Sun Tzu: War on Business, hosted by James Sun?


James Sun

I was first saw James Sun on Trump's The Apprentice, where Mr Sun worked his way through the reality TV show to the final 2. He lost out to the female winner, probably because Mr Trump thought James Sun had tried to plug his own business on the show. Something to that effect. It was never made clear to the audience. It could well be that the winner was a really attractive female.



Anyhow... I thought James Sun did very well in the show, and began to read up on him. He immigrated from South Korea to the US when he was 4 years old. His family wasn't exactly well-off. He studied hard and started his own company while still in school. The reason why I like James Sun is that while he is aggressive in achieving his goals, he was mostly in control of himself. (Except for this one time he got excited during a challenge and kept talking non-stop.)

And if you follow what he has done after the Apprentice, it's quite clear that he was quick to take advantage of the attention he got and started to explore many different opportunities. He's been invited back to South Korea for lectures and has also become spokesperson for a condominium development.

So anyway, when I saw him on the trailers of Sun Tzu: War on Business, I really wanted to see him in action.

Sun Tzu: War on Business

So... Sun Tzu: War on Business is a reality TV programme, produced by Singaporean-production house the Right Angle, where James Sun travels to different cities in Asia Pacific (Beijing, Singapore, Sydney, Melbourne etc) and 'consults' for small businesses there. E.g. He was in Singapore to consult for StyleMart (an Indian ethnic fashion boutique), in Sydney to consult for Witchmount, (a winery), in Beijing to consult for a fitness gym venture etc. 'Good Fren' thought it's rather limited, i.e. the programme had only included consumer goods retailers. I thought it made perfect sense in the context of a TV show. If James Sun were to consult for a plastic pipe manufacturing SME, it would have been really boring to watch.

The 'Sun Tzu' part of the programme comes in when James Sun is ready to give his advice to the subject company and its business. I thought and still think that it is damn awkward to insert principles from Sun Tzu's Art of War halfway through the programme. Everytime James Sun would go,"Soon Tzu says..." Once, I caught one of the business owners raising his eyebrow. It's hilarious. But you have to give it to James Sun, i.e. despite how awkward it is, he still delivers his lines with a straight face.

Fundamentally, I can understand why the Sun Tzu thing anchors the programme. Coz if this was a programme which went,"James Sun says..." Nobody would give a shite... But "Sun Tzu says..." is different! Coz Sun Tzu's famous and dead! Brilliant.

So, I thought... Ok... So these owners of small businesses agree to go on this show where the host will invite a local business leader to help dissect, then give advice for the business. Obviously, the owners realise that type of attention they will get for their business by being on the show. They also realise the potential of getting a local business leader to help/invest in their business. But what they do not realise is that the programme also shows whether the business works out after the 'consultation'. And when it doesn't, it looks really bad.

The most obvious example so far is that of the fitness gym chain in Beijing. It's opened by a Mandarin-speaking angmoh with 'Rothschild' as his surname. O_o As if that's not impressive enough, he was wearing a Wharton Business School t-shirt halfway through the programme. Ooooh... During his business 'transformation', his staff highlighted repeatedly that the relaunch should not clash with the pre-Lunar New Year period as it would be a waste of marketing effort. But he went," 老板说了算," and carried on with it. By the end of the programme, the relaunch had failed. It's quite clear that despite having the education, the money and even the right staff, this business owner failed to deliver because of his perspective. A check online revealed that he had started another business before this one, and that lasted for 2 years.

It's a shame that there isn't an official website for this programme.

Well... In any case, I would recommend for you to catch the next episode of this programme, Tuesday 9.30pm, CNA. The episode will be on the Skoda car distributorship in Singapore.

Tay Ping Hui wants to be PAP MP

I thought I was seeing things when I came across this article in Zaobao.

Tay Ping Hui wants to become a PAP MP. O_o

Last weekend, Straits Times featured this Ah Siah Gia called Clinton Ang out of the blue. I was like... Ok... What's the story, man? Did he invent something? Scale a mountain? Chairman of Singapore Toilets Association? Hawker's son-made-good? What?

After reading the story which took up almost 1 full-page, I realised that Straits Times was merely hardselling this person, suggesting that he (1) was good-looking, (2) would look good in white, and (3) could run for PAP.

(My friend called me up out of the blue and complained about this article. I guess it's really quite jarring.)

FWAH! Both the mainstream Chinese and English papers are hardselling for PAP at the same time.

Then, in cyberspace, you have Minister George Yeo and his 'friends' in the entertainment and business scenes starting a blog together. (Eh? Wasn't Ms Joanne "George Yeo's Blog Kaki" Peh going out with Mr Tay "I wanna be PAP MP" Ping Hui? 臭味相投哦!)

Don't you love how these people keep trying to jump on the PAP wagon! The list just keeps going on and on...

• Ah Siah Gias who are 'entrepreneurs'
• Actors who can hardly act
• Sportsmen who can hardly sport.

PAP membership is now maciam ZOUK membership. For 'cool and happening' people only. And it assumes that the masses are unthinking individuals who are more likely to vote for lookers.

As for the rest, i.e. tak atas tak chantek people, go lim Tiger at a kopitiam and puke on the kerb, please. You are not good/beautiful enough for PAP-ZOUK, but you are likely to be unthinking enough to vote for a good-looker.

If I were one of the old(er) PAP guards, I'd be like... WTF?!
Whatever happened to the need for smart people with heart to lead?

Example:

If Minister Shanmugam is part of PAP and Tay Ping Hui is also part of PAP, does this mean Minister Shanmugam is like Tay Ping Hui?!!!

From left: Former Top Lawyer (Senior Partner and Head of Litigation and Dispute Resolution at the Singapore law firm Allen & Gledhill) & Minister of Law + Home Affairs, Mr K Shanmugam, and Potential PAP MP wannabe & Actor, Mr Tay Ping Hui

For those in the public service, imagine Tay Ping Hui becoming your Parl Sec or Minister?! What a joke to have to put up policy papers to Mr Tay Ping Hui for approval?! O_o

No meaning... Absolutely no meaning whatsoever.

Once again... Association cuts both ways.

If you really need to get a Mediacorp actor to boost your 'viewership', Tay Ping Hui ain't the most popular dude within and outside the industry lah! Never do due diligence again! Just another Jack Neo incident waiting to happen. Don't take my word for it, go check with people in the industry.

Instead, get Gurmit Singh (Top 10 Most Trusted by Singaporeans, ok! Dun Pray Pray!) or Christopher Lee (his performance in Life Transformers was very convincing) lah!

Ohhhh... Paiseh... Gurmit and Christopher ain't no university grads, nor considered as rich businessmen (unlike Jack Neo la). Plus because Christopher Lee is yellow-ribbon-ed, ya?

It's perplexing... What's going on these days...
Seriously... Don't like that lah... Don't make this a joke.

Filling that Management Position

I spotted a senseless trend while going through the job pages.

For positions where one is solely in-charge of a specific function in the company and has a sizeable bunch of people under him, work experience of at least 15 years is sought.

That sounds logical, doesn't it?
You need solid experience (credentials) for these positions, e.g. Head of Department/SVP in the private sector or 'Director' in the public service.

But if we are rational about how the real labour market works, it is senseless to assume that the above-mentioned logic works for ALL companies.

In fact, this 'hiring formula' only works for the top companies where the best people are clamouring to get into, which probably makes up like 5% of all employers out there. And to begin with, these top companies do not advertise directly to fill their management positions.

So what's the deal with those companies which advertise to fill such senior positions?

Firstly, they have advertised because they are experiencing difficulties in filling the positions through their network. Top candidates know these are not the best companies to work for.

Secondly, if these second-rate companies stick to their stated selection criteria strictly and do not pay more than market rate, they will end up with someone who has the seniority but is obviously not the best around (coz the best with 15 years and more would have gone to work for the top companies). In other words, these companies will end up with second-rate Head of Departments and Directors. Not only do second-rate managers produce second-rate work, they also create other problems, such as inability/unwillingness to recognise top-rate talent potentials leading to morale problem etc.

Thirdly, to make things worse, if the specific function which the advertised position is meant to serve is highly specialised, i.e. few people in the workforce are in that industry/function (for example: Director of Diamond-Cutting Engineering), the problem of having to settle for second-best candidates will be more acute.

So, how can such companies break out of the second-rate cycle?

Instead of sticking to dead-end tactics such as hiring the second-best, the better solution is to opt for a candidate who has some experience of the function and has demonstrated potential to be top in his field. You are giving this candidate something which no other company is offering. He will be loyal to you. The vulnerability in his loyalty will only emerge when he becomes that top candidate with '15 years of experience'. (This will be discussed in later paras.)

Of course, such a selection process will be less straightforward than picking someone whose CV fits the bill through a check list or better still, an 'online matching system'. And yes, the above solution sounds risky. This person does not even have 'enough' experience, and therefore he is 'likely to screw things up' versus the option of a second-rate 15 years of experience who is not the best, but at least will deliver a tried and tested second-rate function/product.

Well, this is the 'compromise' a second-rate company has to bear, or remain as a second-rate company. In other words, when second-rate company does not innovate on its hiring policies, it's a clear sign that the company is either unthinking, or uninterested in fighting to become the best. Sticking to the same hiring policies/methods will get you the same stuff (staff). It's pure insanity to expect different results with the same action.

Of course, some like to solve all problems with money. Just pay above market-rate! Everyone is motivated by money!!

For second-rate companies, attracting the best candidates through money alone is a short-term solution. By paying top dollar, you can get the best candidates to walk through your doors, but are unlikely to be able to retain these top talents because top talents will either wish to join and be associated with the best companies eventually, and/or top companies will actively lure them away. In other words, paying more is more disruptive than taking on second-rate candidate.

Hence, it is always more prudent to learn to spot management talent*, then groom and nurture them. The bond developed during this process is less likely to be substituted by money, especially in an Asian context.

* Learning to spot talent is an art, not a science. There is no magic formula or a check list for talent, especially when the environment is dynamic. Hence, talent-grooming is also an iterative process, where BOTH parties need to be aware of the unstable nature of this relationship and always remember the purpose it serves, i.e. to ultimately benefit the organisation.

HR is one of the most important functions in any organisation, but sadly, it is usually overlooked and not appropriately-staffed to begin with. This goes back to the point that it is very tough to hire right. And because it is tough, most would rather pretend that it's not their business.