TR EMERITUS

Many practices become outdated and ineffective. They need to be changed. But who should be responsible to show the way? I consider it to be the duty of the government to recognize that change is needed and take the necessary steps to make the change. Here are some examples: a) We need new employment practice. The job market is quite different from the old days, in many ways. b) We need to change our education policies, so that our young people can get jobs that are available in the future. c) We need to increase our birth rate and make it attractive for families to have children. As a society, we have not make the necessary changes. Who is to blame? I blame the government and the ministers. It is their duty to recognize the problem, and to provide the leadership and practical steps to implement the change and achieve the desired goals. Some apologists said that we should not expect the government to do everything. This is a nonsense statement. It is the duty of the government to recognize the problem faced by society and the economy. It is their duty to make the changes and improvements. The current ministers have a mistaken belief that the market will find the solution. In most cases, the market cannot find the solution. In fact, if the market is not regulated, the enterprising business people will exploit the market failures to make a large profit for themselves, at the expense of the consumers. We need a competent government who is able to make the required changes and improvements.   Tan Kin Lian      Read More →

One of the most challenging parts of my national service was serving as a “Guard Commander,” for the camp. Technically, a Guard Commander has an obligation to check the identity of everyone entering the camp, regardless of who they are and after midnight, he (usually are) has a job to ensure nobody enters the camp. However, while that is the technicality, things are rather different in practice. For example, one tends to be a little laxer when it comes to guys from your unit (you are only guard commander for the night – you got to live with these guys for the rest of term you are serving) and certain high-ranking officers get exempted from checks (in Khatib Camp, everyone knew the Chief of Artillery). As a rule of thumb, many of the senior officers were decent people. The head of logistics of Headquarters Singapore Artillery asked me why I stopped him when his car had a camp label. When I explained that the label only allowed the car in, he praised me for being diligent. Unfortunately, this reasonable quality was limited to those of a certain rank. In my time on the job, I encountered too many midranking officers (usually captain) who showed their obvious displeasure at being stopped. Now, I will admit that more often than not, I let them pass. The guy outranked me many times over and was actually a familiar face. I left the army feeling that there were times where I wish I had been more assertive in my role as a guard commander. I think that had I shown a bit more spine then, I would have grown into a more “successful” person. At the time, it seemed like an unspoken rule that you give way to your superiors. The concept of the Singapore Armed Forces (SAF) is to “Serve And F**Off, so the smart thing to do is to avoid conflicts in order to finish your term of service with minimal fuss. It was only towards the end of my national service, when I read a book written by someone who had been “Sergeant-Major of the Army,” in the US army, when I saw how “superiors could be told to follow the rules. The author described how he was assigned by the camp commandant to issue speeding tickets on the base back when he was a mere sergeant. He described how the colonels would remind him that they outranked him by so many times and his classic reply was inevitably, “I appreciate that you outrank me, Sir. So, it’s even more embarrassing to be caught in your position, Sir.” I think this book and those moments on guard duty, because life is essentially about management. As much as everyone talks about “Equality,” the truth is that unless you are a hermit meditating in cave in the Antarctica, all of us get stuck in a hierarchy of some sort and at any given time, there’s someone who is going to have power over you. As an employee, you have a boss or many bosses. As an entrepreneur, you have customers. When the President enters the room, you stand at attention. When there’s an election, the president will come knocking on your door, vowing to serve you. So, for most of us, life is inevitably about managing through the various hierarchies that we run into in our daily lives and human nature being what it is, an industry on telling you how to mange has developed. Everyone is a management guru. Unfortunately, all the management gurus in the world are only focused in one direction – namely downwards. There is no shortage of wisdom as to how you should manage people below you. Nobody it seems, wants to discuss how to manage the guy above you. The conventional wisdom, particularly in hierarchical Asian societies, is that the guy on top is inevitably right because he or she got there because they are smarter, more experienced and wiser than you. The guy at the top inevitably drives something better than you and lives in a bigger house, so he or she must be right. This thinking prevails in professional services, where more often than not, the service provider ends up bending over backwards to “please” the client and the client is always right Is being right so important that you end up not getting paid? Well, the sad truth is that “superiors” might have more power than you but they are not always right and as a good subordinate, you actually have an obligation of sorts to tell them when they are being a d***. In professional services, its as simple as, although the client is the ultimate decision maker, clients, like superiors don’t often adhere to a “my decision – my responsibility” way of thinking. The client’s back up is “I hired you because you are the expert – why didn’t you advise me,” which in turn leads to the possibility of not getting paid. Too many people talk about sacrificing “integrity” if it may interfere with your getting paid. While that is true of low-level peons, the people who get ahead understand that integrity is vital for business, especially if your business is essentially selling advice The client pays you for your expertise and he or she will only believe in your expertise if you are willing to sacrifice the pay to stand your advice. Being able to manage the people with power over you is never taught and needs to be learnt on the job. I think of my times as guard commander in the army and how I failed. Had the find the courage to stand by what I was talking about. It was not easy. I recently had to manage a young man who was drunk and thought it was acceptable to try and get frisky with two young women and rude to the two Indian guys helping them do their job. His reply was “I work for a respectable law firm.” I had to tell him that who he worked for didn’t excuse his behaviour and if he didn’t behave, the venue would remove him in a not so pleasant manner. He eventually got the message. There are a good many people, who actually believe that their situation in life makes them immune from the norms of social behaviour. It can be “I am your boss,” or “I work in a profession,” or “I am related to so and so.” In a way, you can’t blame people for letting certain perks get to the head. I’ve mentioned that it takes a certain level of strength of character for expatriates to remain decent people because when you have people throwing the good things at you, temptation does have a way of spoiling you. So, you need to remind people in a position above you that “superiority” means “superior” responsibilities as well as “superior” behaviour. Unless the “superior” does not have these two things, they are not superior people, just people with more money and power. Sure, there will be some who don’t understand this and there’s very little one can do about them. However, these are the ones who eventually fade into bankruptcy and obscurity. The ones who understand that people are only “superior” because of their responsibilities and behaviour, these are the ones that endure.   Tang Li *Although I’ve been based mainly in Singapore for nearly two decades, I’ve had the privilege of being able meet people who have crossed borders and cultures. I’ve befriended ministers and ambassadors and worked on projects involving a former head of state. Yet, at the same time, I’ve had the privilege of befriending migrant labourers and former convicts. All of them have a story to tell. All of them add to the fabric of life. I hope to express the stories that inspire us to create life as it should be.      Read More →

Who's this "we" who are obsessed with royalty? Personally I don't give a flick (of my scepter). I never understood why the real citizens of Britain tolerate it...tradition or not its a great scam...It will be interesting to see what happens to the British monarchy after Elizabeth II. She is beloved as the calm center of a fast-moving and ever-changing world. Though wealthy and removed, she looks like, and clearly revels in, being a grandmother. She has lived a life of service and duty. Queen Elizabeth II had a brilliant opportunity to do something about race relations on a global scale and prove the value of the Monarchy by throwing the entire weight of the British Crown behind making Meghan Markle feel completely welcome in the UK. She should have made it known to all that any racism directed at the Duchess would be seen an attack on the Monarchy. Instead, Meghan felt abandoned. What an embarrassment it is that she had to reach out to Human Resources for help. Are the British so caught up in the pageantry that they can't see the Royal Family is a royal joke? Look no further for proof: How it coddles Andrew, son of Elizabeth and brother of Charles, and a former frequent house guest of Jeffrey Epstein, whose mansions and private islands were the alleged locus of a underage girls sex-trafficking enterprise. So far Andrew, who is credibly accused of partaking in Epstein's dirty business, has escaped repercussions because his rich and powerful family is shielding him. The Biden administration should impose sanctions on Andrew as well as the British "royal" family for their role in protecting Andrew from the consequences of his unlawful and morally reprehensible behavior. Charles is a much different character--flawed, lacking empathy, self-serving and entitled. He is not beloved. There is this inexplicable drive for dominance and power that seems to pervade everything and may also be related to the dark history of slavery (which, of course is the other gigantic blind spot). [LINK] In decline since the end of World War I, the nation has a giant collective chip on its shoulder. The Windsors & their palaces and art collections are also perhaps the biggest tourist draw the U.K. has. But the truth is that today it is little more than a tourist attraction and its younger royal members are like Disney employees; at the end of the day, they want to take the costumes off and be regular people, but their nation and the media that makes a living of the royals won't let them. Getting rid of its leading act will cost big money. These people do not work.. sitting on piles of money they did not earn..are waited on hand and foot. Own many houses and property they did not earn as well and yet they demand respect..What a con.... All the money that is spent and has been wasted on the royal family could have done and a lot of good for the people of Britain. Ultimately, that's why Harry and Meghan left Britain. It is less about royal family racism and mostly that they just don't want to be part of the old show any longer. They want their own show and now, as shown by the fact that 17 million people watched their interview with Oprah, they have it. How in the world can Harry and Meghan feel like they deserve to buy a house in California for $18 million with money they did not earn or work for...I get why Harry wanted out because of what it did to his mother...but the pompous ..arrogant attitude of the monarchy is ridiculous.. I don’t claim that the UK is anywhere near perfect. We have endless hypocrisies of our own - tribalism of any sort - from village to nation kills. Unless the monarchy is willing to adapt, it is indeed a relic of the past. We should not be simply promoting heredity: deference by blood - a view that is quite anachronistic to the modern times. Why is some countries STILL entrenched in this old British caste system where one's birth into a specific family determines one's social standing, and privilege of owning wealth, lands and property... is baffling. It's time to cut the colonial cord to the British Royal Family. Put up the flag - dammed it!   Sjorne Shen      Read More →