Diversity in the Workplace: A Reality or a Pipe-dream? [Re-post]

[This is a re-post of an earlier blog]

With the influx of more foreigners into our small island nation, Singaporeans are often asked by government and community leaders to extend a warm welcome to them. To not just tolerate them but understand and appreciate their cultures and their traditions.

Singapore has always been a land of immigrants and multi-racialism and multiculturalism are not foreign concepts to most Singaporeans. They are part of our national ethos and value system. As such it would seem natural for our workplaces to embrace diversity in all forms as an extension of the national narrative that has been such an integral part of our history.

But I have my doubts. The nature of companies is to stick with the status quo – the prevailing organisational culture. And if the prevailing culture appears to promote uniformity in thought, communication and deeds where management teams are routinely filled with people who think and act in the same way, then organisational change to accommodate diversity is going to be a pipe dream.

Source: Quoteistan.com

The reason for this is the phenomenon called “shadow of the leader” (Senn, Larry E. and John R. Childress, The Secret of a Winning Culture: Building High Performance Teams. Leadership Press, Los Angeles, CA, 1999). Corporate culture is a direct reflection of the senior executives. Employees take their clues on how to behave and how to get ahead by watching the collective and individual behaviour of the senior executives (the principia project, John R. Childress). This is why effecting any organisational change has to come from the top.

Diversity comes in different forms –  gender, cultural, religious and, the one I am concerned with here, personality types.Diversity in personality types in the workplace refers to people who think, process information, communicate and act differently because of how they are hardwired.

Organisational experts are recognising the benefits of having diversity of personality types in the workplace. Diversity can be a strength if it is harnessed properly. Singapore’s umbilical connection with the rapidly changing global environment, makes diversity in management teams a valuable asset in tackling the accompanying challenges and managing in diversity an important skill to have.

But embracing diversity must be a key component of the organisational culture and if it isn’t, then strong leadership is going to be absolutely pivotal in ensuring that it is.

In a 2006 study by Towers Perrin, companies with high culture scores consistently outperformed those with low culture scores on a variety of business metrics (the principia project, John R. Childress).

Jack Welch was quoted as saying, “A negative or resistant culture can derail even the best strategy”.

So if diversity of personality types within a management team is an asset which deserves to be a key component of an organisation’s corporate culture, then it takes a bold and enlightened leadership to ensure that it does.

There are many personality type tests which career coaches and human resource experts use to inform employees of their personality types and hence their preferred way of communicating and getting work done.

Many bosses conduct training sessions for their staff where personality tests are done and the results shared and explained so that employees get to understand themselves and the colleagues they work with. All this in an effort to promote teamwork, cooperation and collaboration and a happier, more congenial work environment.

The commonly used personality tests – Myers Briggs Type Indicator, Gallup’s StrengthsFinder and DISC – typically require respondents (employees) to answer a number of questions, usually in a given amount of time. And usually the results of these tests would reveal strengths or certain signature or dominant personality types which may explain how one communicates or behaves in a work environment.

It must be remembered that the context is important when doing such tests – what role are you assuming when you take the test – for e.g. employee or at a workplace, as a spouse or parent at home, or as a player in a sports team. We all wear many hats in our lives and it is important to understand that personality tests are only relevant for the context that we set ourselves in and the results are not gospel but can change in a different context or over time.

While the time and resources put into training staff to understand and embrace their personality types are admirable and encouraging, I believe the follow-through is much more important. The end objectives of such training are always the organisational benefits of better teamwork and communication and a happier and more productive workplace.

How many organisations find themselves reverting to their old habits, unable to achieve the end objectives by incorporating diversity in their management team? How many management teams give in to the dominant voices within and remain reluctant to change, shying away from embracing the diversity of personality types, leveraging on the different skill sets and perspectives to overcome organisational challenges?

These are questions that leaders in organisations need to seriously ponder on and take decisive action if they are to effect lasting changes in their organisations. Leadership is key.

Source: http://www.unnatiunlimited.com

Effective organisational change can only happen with effective leadership (Deal, Terrence E. and Allan A. Kennedy, Corporate Cultures, Perseus, 2000).

Management teams may eschew diversity as it may cause disharmony if senior executives are uncomfortable with it and fear unwanted delay in forging consensus.

But Mr Peter Ong, Head of the Singapore Civil Service, said recently at the Public Service Leadership Dinner, that “the dramatic pace of strategic ruptures taking place all around the world”, may require senior executives to get used to managing in diversity even if it means there may not be clear solutions, requiring tough decisions and empathy to steer clear of one size fits all type of solutions.

Mr Peter Ong, Head of the Civil Service. Image Credit: Public Service Division

In conclusion, there needs to be a higher level of commitment from management teams to encourage diversity at the workplace not because it is the latest buzzword in management literature but for the organisational benefits it accrues to the department or company and for its more long term positive impact.

What Defines You (re-post)

[The following is a re-post from an earlier blog]

Early last month, before the new academic year began I received the sad news that one of my students, a petite 18 year old girl, had contracted cancer. She had just completed her 2nd Year and was looking forward to start her 6-month internship in the new semester.

I met her distraught father to help initiate the administrative process needed to defer her studies till she gets better. It is always heart-breaking to hear about people, especially people who are near and dear to you, who are stricken with the scourge of cancer. Recent medical and bio-technological advances have made huge strides in the fight against cancer, improving the survival rates significantly, but often this is still scant consolation for those stricken with the disease and to their loved ones.

This latest reminder of the fragility of life, that everyday is a gift which one should treasure and cherish was especially sobering for me. It made me think of my father and how he worked so hard all his life so much so that when he retired, he seemed to have lost his raison d’etre and appeared displaced and confused about post-retirement life.

It reminded me of a question a management trainer asked of me? “What defines you?” And one of the things I said was my work defines me.

But the critical question, especially after this latest news about my student, is, “Does your work define you solely as a person or a human being?”

I hope the answer is a negative and it should be a resounding negative. Men, especially, feel their self-worth and their standing in society is a function of their achievements and success at work. But it is indeed a very sad day when society uses this as the sole gauge of how good a human being someone is.

A person is still someone’s sister or brother, someone’s mother or father, someone’s spouse and someone’s friend and not just someone’s boss or colleague. And that’s how, I feel, we should all be remembered by those around us, as a whole person who has a life outside of work.

I also began to think about the causes of cancer and it is a well-known fact that stress is one of the chief contributing factors. This brings us back to our jobs and our workplace.

Is all the stress at work really worth it?

Let us first be upfront about one thing. I am not proposing that all workplaces should be stress-free zones. That would not be possible. Stress can be a good thing up to a certain point because it encourages us to push beyond the boundaries, to continually do better and improve.

Media professionals often talk about how the media and communications industry is one of the most stressful in the world today. Well, having spent 14 years in the media industry, I can vouch for that sentiment. But I’ll be quick to add that stress is not the sole preserve of media industry.

Just ask former Lehman Brothers CFO, Ms Erin Callan. She wrote a brutally honest opinion piece in The New York Times entitled, Is There Life After Work?

In the article she lamented not LIVING her life to the fullest and making work the centre of her life. This meant putting all else, including her family, friends, husband and marriage second to her work. Not surprisingly her marriage ended at about the time that the 2008 financial crisis struck U.S. markets causing the collapse of Lehman Brothers. Callan resigned just months before the collapse.

She wrote, “…when I left my job, it devastated me. I couldn’t just rally and move on. I did not know how to value who I was versus what I did. What I did was who I was.”

In Callan’s case, she left her job following financial collapse of the markets decimated her company. But how much worse is it if you are forced out due to an incurable disease like cancer? You see what terminal illnesses like cancer do to you is to strip you of all your worldly possessions and of all the things that are not of any importance to you and re-focuses your mind on the people and things that are truly important and which bring you genuine happiness.

Callan’s thoughts were echoed chillingly by the late Linds Redding, an art director at advertising companies BBDO and Saatchi & Saatchi. Redding died of esophageal cancer at the age of 52 in October 2012 after spending years as a successful advertising executive. Cancer was a wake-up call, a dark epiphany that suddenly put his life into proper perspective. It was an especially heart-wrenching moment when  he learnt that the cancer was inoperable from his doctor .

He wrote a visceral blog entitled “A Short Lesson In Perspective” which became viral in the aftermath of his death especially among creative executives in the advertising industry. In the blog, he lambasted his former colleagues for sacrificing precious times and occasions with family and friends for the sake of work by calling them “f*****g mad”, “Deranged” and “So disengaged from reality it’s not even funny.”

He further labelled the advertising industry a scam and a con; the con being that the industry forces you to believe that there is nothing more important than the client brief and the work involved whether it is a TV commercial or more elaborate ad campaign. That this work somehow gives more meaning to one’s life than anything else.

Of course readers of his blog say that his chilling rant is applicable to other industries and the problem of placing work above all else is something many of us are guilty of.

But it is up to us to recognize that life is not all about work and that having a good work-life balance is actually healthy for optimal work performance.

It is about coming to terms with the realities in the work-place concerning taking on additional work responsibilities, bonuses, promotions and weighing these against being a good spouse, a responsible and loving parent and a filial son or daughter.

In Singapore, we have our own Linds Redding in the late Dr Richard Teo, who gave up a promising career in the public sector as an ophthalmologist to become an aesthetic surgeon. He died of lung cancer at the relatively young age of 40. He gave his own account of the meaning of life and what it means to be successful and happy in a powerful and sobering Youtube video. (Note: video is a little grainy and has poor sound quality).

The Year’s Disruption Must Lead to Re-invigoration Without Destruction

Its been 4 + months since I last wrote anything on my blog and to be honest I was feeling a little guilty for not doing so even though I had good reason as my workload piled on incessantly during this time forcing me to set aside my writing. But I’m back with this last blog of 2016.

As with most people who approach the year end, I began to reflect on the past year and look back at what I have achieved and what the new year could have in store for me. But then I began to look beyond myself and at the world around me and what transpired in the past 12 months and searched agonisingly for a single word that would aptly describe how I felt about 2016.

The words that came to my mind were somewhat dark and sombre like “painful”, “tragic”, “melancholic”, “gloomy” and “desolate”. Maybe it wasn’t surprising because of the rash of celebrity deaths that had occured this year which made for some woeful reading. Just check out the list of celebrity deaths we’ve had this year which includes, politicians, actors, directors, singers, sports and fashion icons.

Alan Rickman, Alan Thicke, Anton Yelchin, Arnold Palmer, Carrie Fischer, Christina Grimmie, Craig Strickland, David Bowie, Debbie Reynolds, Fidel Castro, George Kennedy, George Michael, Gene Wilder, Glen Frey, John Glenn, Leonard Cohen, Maurice White, Michael Cimino, Muhammad Ali, Prince, Robert Vaughn, Sonia Rykiel, Zsa Zsa Gabor.

Maybe its because many of these celebrities were very familiar to me and I feel like I grew up with them listening and dancing to their songs or watching them on TV or the big screen, playing iconic characters which left an indelible print on the pop culture that has defined my generation.

But then looking past this and reflecting further on other world events just made me realise that the word I was looking for was DISRUPTION.

Perhaps a little overused and becoming more common in our vernacular, we are seeing DISRUPTION at a scale that is, quite frankly, a little scary, in virtually all segments of human life.

Systems, which in their very nature, are designed to be stable, are being destabilised by new players, new technology and a push to streamline processes, cutting away layers of hierarchy and bureaucracy and connecting consumers directly to producers and products through a process sometimes referred to as disintermediation.

The DISRUPTION that is currently seen in the finance and investment sector is one example where disintermediation is happening at a rapid pace leading to many financial advisors watching nervously for any signs that redundancy is taking root in the banks and financial institutions that they are employed at.

The taxi sector is another great example of DISRUPTION where the influx of 3rd party booking apps like Uber and Grab and private hire cars, have prompted the Singapore taxi companies (like Trans-Cab and SMRT) to lower their rental rates, offer incentives to attract more taxi drivers to join them and perhaps even consider removing the midnight surcharge which private hire cars do not charge.

In the higher education sector, polytechnics and universities are reviewing how they can re-focus more on competencies and skills rather than developing 3 or 4 year diploma and degree programmes which have a substantial concentration on academic knowledge. As part of the larger SkillsFuture movement in Singapore, a new skills certification framework which allows people to do short courses to learn new skills through remote learning is quickly being developed. This DISRUPTION would mean that educational institutions and the government have to part ways with a host of huge legacy systems and start looking at developing nationally accredited alternative certification of competencies and skills, see how public and private employers hire based on these certifications and if higher educational institutions will enrol and admit students based on these alternative certification programmes.

The media industry has been identified as the most disrupted industry out there and not surprisingly so. News organisations are looking for new ways of engaging their readers and are forced to reconsider and revise time-honoured premises and models on which they operated for decades. News can now be accessed on mobile phones on social sites rather than on traditional media sites. News can also be customised and packaged for each individual and accessed through the individual’s preferred social site on his mobile device at his own convenience.

An example of this collaboration between social sites and news publishers is the New York Times using Facebook’s Instant Articles (IA) application where NYT’s selected news articles will be shared on Facebook in the hope of better engagement with its readers.

Digital disruption of this nature where consumers are accessing products and services on their mobiles, disrupts other related industries and the audience measurement and advertising industry comes to mind. Where previously TV audience and newspaper readership were measured by methods that can best be described as educated guesses, now new metrics have emerged for internet-enabled media sites which can accurately determine actual engagement through various metrics like Click Through Rates, View Through Rates, Cost Per Click/View and Engagement Rate. All thanks to data analytics of consumer data captured digitally as more of them use digital screens facilitated by broadband internet connections.

Native advertising (or sponsored articles or videos that resemble genuine editorials) has also emerged as one of the main generators of revenue for an increasing number of digital publishers even though confidence and trust in verified news sources can be compromised if this is not done carefully.

DISRUPTION is happening on such a wide spectrum of services that this could be an unrelenting theme in our lives in the coming years and probably rising in its pace and intensity as well.

The crowdfunding phenomenon that took off by storm several years ago by Kickstarter and IndieGoGo, has now adapted itself in many various ways in other fields like welfare donations and philanthropy and widened its concept to embrace crowdsourcing. Almost anyone can use this concept to offer a range of services and products like disaster relief, logo design, information gathering and intelligence and more. This disrupts the traditional systems and organisational infrastructure set up to provide these services in the first place as they can now be provided more efficiently and cheaply.

But DISRUPTION is also being seen in the political front and the best example of that was Donald Trump winning the U.S. presidential elections held on 8 November 2016. An outsider who lacked political experience and who is more familiar with making business deals. Trump is willing to slaughter every sacred cow there is in order to pursue his goals. He was not a popular figure even within his own Republican party at the time of nomination. But it seems that the average American had bread and butter concerns which were not being adequately addressed by the incumbent Obama administration that was more preoccupied with the need to embrace technological advancement, globalisation and open and free trade which were the main drivers of disruption in the lives of the average American.

Crowdsourcing in the political/ideological field took on a more sinister complexion, with the terrorist group, ISIS, recruiting its jihadist members from all over the world to fight for its twisted and much maligned cause in Iraq and Syria. This has resulted in tragic loss of lives and DISRUPTION in the lives of innocent Syrians who are fleeing their country in a perilous journey as refugees to Turkey enroute to Europe. It has created one of the most trying and difficult human and political crises in recent history as Europe struggles to cope with the sheer numbers that are fleeing, not to mention the anger and disenchantment this has caused among ordinary Europeans and the ferocity of political debates in the continent raging over how to balance humanity with the needs of its own citizens.

Closer to home, China has re-exerted its claim over a large swathe of the South China Sea in what some political observers would describe as belligerent by building military bases on several artificial islands reclaimed from the sea. This has disrupted the stability in this region where several ASEAN countries are themselves locked in a dispute over territorial claims of several islands. The fact that peace and stability in the South China Sea was maintained for decades inspite of territorial disputes among the ASEAN countries is testament to the strength and unity of the regional economic and political grouping. But China’s entry into the equation has upset the balance somewhat and is now causing some discomfort among ASEAN members and testing the ties and bonds that have been nurtured for so long over the years.

All this led me to think about DISRUPTION and whether it is intrinsically bad for everyone when it upsets and brings distress and alarm to many people. And then I realised that just like the mythical phoenix that rose from the ashes, disruption happens for a reason; so that systems can get better, more robust and more efficient through a process of renewal, revival and re-ingoration.

But in this constant quest for change to do things better, let’s remember that change needs to be explained and people need to be convinced that the change is for their own good. Let’s not forget that people are at the centre of everything we do and we need to facilitate Change with Compassion. But change we must, if we are to survive.

I would like to end with a song sung by the most gifted poet, lyricist and singer who influenced political thought with his songs and won a Nobel Peace prize for it, Robert Allen Zimmerman, better known as Bob Dylan.

THE TIMES THEY ARE A’CHANGIN

Come gather ’round people
Wherever you roam
And admit that the waters
Around you have grown
And accept it that soon
You’ll be drenched to the bone.
If your time to you
Is worth savin’
Then you better start swimmin’
Or you’ll sink like a stone
For the times they are a-changin’.

Come writers and critics
Who prophesize with your pen
And keep your eyes wide
The chance won’t come again
And don’t speak too soon
For the wheel’s still in spin
And there’s no tellin’ who
That it’s namin’.
For the loser now
Will be later to win
For the times they are a-changin’.

Come senators, congressmen
Please heed the call
Don’t stand in the doorway
Don’t block up the hall
For he that gets hurt
Will be he who has stalled
There’s a battle outside
And it is ragin’.
It’ll soon shake your windows
And rattle your walls
For the times they are a-changin’.

Come mothers and fathers
Throughout the land
And don’t criticize
What you can’t understand
Your sons and your daughters
Are beyond your command
Your old road is
Rapidly agin’.
Please get out of the new one
If you can’t lend your hand
For the times they are a-changin’.

The line it is drawn
The curse it is cast
The slow one now
Will later be fast
As the present now
Will later be past
The order is
Rapidly fadin’.
And the first one now
Will later be last
For the times they are a-changin’.

Songwriters: BOB DYLAN

Happy New Year everyone!

Schooling Races To Capture Olympic Record And Singaporean Hearts

I have been thinking of a couple of things that have given Singaporeans reason for joy and celebration as well as some serious introspection.

The 13 of August 2016 would be forever etched in the minds of Singaporeans. The mood among Singaporeans from all walks of life, has been rather celebratory and for good reason. Our golden boy of the swimming pool, Joseph Schooling, has penned his name firmly into the annals of Singapore’s sporting history with a breathtaking win in the 100 m butterfly event in a new Olympic record of 50.39 seconds at Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.

Photo Credits: MediaCorp okto Channel

Many Singaporeans got up early on the fateful Saturday morning to catch the race “live” on TV and rejoiced with him and his elated parents, May and Colin Schooling, as they witnessed years of strenuous, unforgiving training, sacrifice and unshakeable self-belief pay off in Joseph achieving Singapore’s 1st ever gold medal in the Olympics.

What made this win significant as well was Joseph beat his childhood idol, Michael Phelps of the U.S. into second place by almost a second. Two other world class swimmers, Chad Le Clos of South Africa and Lazslo Cseh of Hungary tied with Phelps in second place which in itself was very unusual.

Photo credit: MediaCorp okto Channel

The welcome home party at Singapore’s Changi Airport was raucous and overwhelming. A special motion was moved in Parliament to recognise Schooling’s achievement, culminating in an open top bus parade which started off from his home neighbourhood at Marine Parade.

Source: Channel News Asia: Joseph Schooling is Singapore’s First Olympic Champion

Singaporeans of all races, religions and backgrounds took pride in Schooling’s amazing achievement and were unabashed in their joy and gushing with praise for their champion. The fact that Schooling is of Eurasian descent and therefore his Olympic feat finding less of an emotional connection with Singaporeans of a certain race was never an issue. Singaporeans, no matter the race – Chinese, Malay, Indian, Eurasian or any other race – were equal in their expression of joy that a fellow homegrown Singaporean was able to achieve Olympic glory.

So you can understand my uneasiness when I read the media reports this past week on the findings of the Channel News Asia-Institute of Policy Studies survey on race and relations in Singapore.

Among the main findings were some that I found personally disconcerting. Some of these are the fact that the majority of Singaporeans are still uncomfortable talking about racial issues which has led to some unanswered questions about religious and cultural practices among the various races in Singapore.

One in three among the minority races in Singapore felt discriminated against. More than half of minority respondents in the survey agreed with statements such as “people have acted as if they are better than you”. About 60 per cent of all respondents had heard racist comments. Under half of the respondents noting that such comments were made by workplace colleagues and friends. [Source: CNA 2nd Report – Racism Still A Problem for Some Singaporeans]

And in the last of the CNA-IPS reports, the survey concluded that most Singaporeans would still prefer a President or Prime Minister of the same race as themselves. [Source: CNA 3rd Report – Most Singaporeans Want Someone of the Same Race As Prime Minister, President] 

However, the majority still supported multi-culturalism in Singapore and that all races should be treated fairly and with respect. The majority still felt that success did not depend on your ethnicity.

While race relations in Singapore is still a work-in-progress (and will always be in my view), it is good to note that the government is acutely aware of this and continues to seek ways to bridge gaps between the races here.

In any multi-ethnic, multi-religious country, the natural sway is for the majority group to exert its influence in the country’s political, social and economic sectors. It may even be argued that the minority groups have to make the effort to fit into these sectoral constructs as best they can so that they do not become irrelevant or marginalised.

However, the Singapore government has so far, not taken this for granted and has deliberately taken steps to ensure the minority groups are engaged and their concerns are heard and inter-ethnic bonds are continually strengthened.

But I sense there is a renewed urgency among the political elite to up the ante where improving race relations here is concerned. There is a new Channel News Asia documentary called Regardless of Race presented by none other than PAP MP, Minister of State, Communications and Information & Education and Chairman of OnePeople.SG, Dr Janil Puthucheary

The documentary featured a social experiment that was carried out which though simple in its aim and logic, turned out to be rather impactful in its revelation to the participants. You can check it out in the video link below:

REGARDLESS OF RACE – SOCIAL EXPERIMENT

What was revealing was that members of the minority races were surprised to find how much they underestimated their own feelings of being undervalued because of their ethnicity and how the majority race (Chinese) have never viewed themselves as being privileged just because of their race even if that is the reality in Singapore. A simple but stark illustration of this is to hear how Chinese Singaporeans felt discriminated or slighted while being in a foreign country either as a tourist or for work purposes, where they are not the majority race. The incidents they experienced are not very different from what minorities in Singapore may face.

I personally believe our Singapore youths can do much more to learn about the various ethnic groups in Singapore and to differentiate race from religion, ethnicity, language and nationality. So an Indian man may not necessarily be of the Hindu faith, may not necessarily have a beef restricted diet, neither does he necessarily have to speak Tamil, nor does he have to be born in India. And yes, he need not necessarily be dark-skinned, even though the majority are.

Perhaps the best illustration of understanding the nuances of race, ethnicity, language and nationality was the recent Olympics. In table tennis, China showcased its dominance in the event in a startling manner, not just because it swept the gold in the men’s, women’s and doubles events. China-born players represented 21 other countries, including France, Luxembourg, Canada, Germany, Austria, Portugal, Congo, Qatar and Singapore, in the event.

Being Chinese meant little to them compared to the flag they represented. They fought hard to win and to represent their country with pride. And their countrymen cheered and supported them whole-heartedly. There are just some things that transcend race, religion and ethnicity. Joseph Schooling showed us all what that was. And that is being Singaporean.

Netflix Disrupts Singapore Pay TV Market – Change In Small Bytes

Last month, the condominium that I live in had its Annual General Meeting (AGM) which turned out to be a lively and momentous occasion, a far cry from the yawn that it was over the last few years.

The main talking point, even days after the AGM, was the ousting of several supposedly “key” members of the Management Committee (MC), voted out by residents who felt that they acted in a manner that did not prioritise their interests and fully represent their concerns.

The former MC members who were not re-elected were unhappy and red-faced, to say the least. It certainly did not feel good being displaced like that. What really took them by surprise was the boldness of the newly elected MC members and their supporters and the readiness of residents to speak their minds and lock horns with the MC old guards in a frank debate over how the estate should be run.

But what really shocked me was how this feeling of being displaced was so hurtful and so deep-seated that it prompted someone (possibly a resident and/or supporter of the MC old guards who were ousted) to write a poison letter, sent to the mailboxes of each and every resident in the condo, disparaging the newly elected MC members, arguing that the election results are null and void and that an extraordinary general meeting be called for another election!

It sure sucks to be displaced and to be rendered unimportant or inconsequential, isn’t it?

DISRUPTION – Can’t Be That Bad, Can It?

But this is exactly what the 21st century economy will do to a lot of people if we are not prepared for it. Disruption is the new buzzword that underlies the strategy of many new internet enabled start-ups. The impact they are having on the economy is significant enough to be singled out as the main THREAT by executives doing a SWOT analysis of their businesses, anxious to come up with strategies that will ensure they stay relevant in the foreseeable future. Thanks, in no small part, to the Internet and the advances made in mobile broadband technology.

Credit: Televisione Streaming – https://www.flickr.com/photos/televisione/

Take for example, what is going on in the media landscape, specifically the free-to-air TV (FTA) and pay TV markets, both of which, for a long time, defined very much by the linear programming model.

We all know that FTA TV and even cable TV networks around the world, not just in Singapore, are casting a wary eye over the emergence of Netflix and similar non-linear, a la cart TV content and movie service providers like iflix and Hooq. Will our own FTA channels be displaced by these up and coming service providers?

To really answer this question, we need to understand what Netflix really is about and what it is not.

NETFLIX – What Is It Exactly?

Netflix started its Singapore service on 7 January 2016, increasing its footprint to 190 countries, becoming a truly global internet TV network.

Netflix is a global internet streaming service that provides TV and movie content to audiences in an on-demand basis over internet enabled devices, like SMART TVs, laptops, iPads and smart phones. It comes under a category of internet services called OTT or Over-The-Top which refers to services offered over the open internet (wifi) or on top of a customer’s broadband service provided by an Internet Service Provider (ISP).

It is non-linear – it embraces a very millennial trait – “I want it now, when I am free to watch it and not when it is programmed by someone who dictates the time when I SHOULD watch it”.

In fact, so confident is Netflix about its non-linear model that it predicts that non-linear, internet TV will one day replace linear TV, just like mobile phone has replaced fixed line telephone.

Personally, I am not as optimistic as Netflix on this as I feel that there will always be a place for linear TV as there is a segment of the population of viewers who like watching TV shows on a regular programmed schedule. It is part of who they are and more importantly, it is what characterises their viewing habits.

The Millennial TV Viewer                                                                                                Credit: Laurence Simon (Crap Mariner)

Reed Hastings, the CEO of Netflix, has gone to extraordinary lengths to clearly specify what his company is NOT. And it is very interesting and I feel that its worth reviewing it here again.

Netflix is not a pay-per-view service neither is it a service that shows ad-supported content. It is a monthly subscription service with unlimited viewing, commercial free.

Netflix is about flexibility, freedom, fun, fuss-free (simplicity) and choice. You are not tied to a long term contract and you can quit anytime and come back on again anytime.

A CATALYST For Change In The Market

This is a far cry from the complex, mind boggling and stress inducing contracts that multi-channel video programming distributors (MVPDs) subject their subscribers to. You only have to look at the many bundles/packages that cable TV service providers, StarHub and Singtel Mio, have available to see how local MVPDs effectively limit choice for their customers according to content types and price.

We are already seeing how Netflix’s entry into the Singapore market has hastened the tightening of regulatory framework here to better protect customer interests. Just recently the Media Development Authority (MDA) introduced changes to the Media Market Conduct Code allowing customers to exit from fixed term contracts without payment of early termination charges where there is:

• Increase in subscription fee
• Removal of material channel(s)
• Removal of material sports content within a channel
• Removal of at least 20 per cent of total number of channels in entire pay-TV service since the point of subscription

But rather than see it as a threat from a malevolent competitor, both the 2 big pay TV service providers, StarHub and Singtel’s Mio, have included Netflix as a channel that subscribers can have as an option on their set-up boxes. This is, in no small way, due to the Netflix’s deep rooted belief in network neutrality which essentially means a quid pro quo scenario whereby internet service providers (ISPs) do not charge Netflix costs of interconnection and Netflix, likewise, does not charge a percentage of the broadband revenue earned by ISPs  whenever consumers switch onto Netflix to stream content which, according Netflix, is a significant portion of a consumer’s broadband usage.

But to me, the clincher in this battle for eyeballs among the media giants of the world is that Netflix delivers content that people WANT to watch because it is entertaining. CONTENT is still king and it is the overarching glue that holds all other factors of its business model together, delivering a compelling service with a strong USP.

Credit: https://www.flickr.com/photos/televisione

Netflix has essentially listened to customers’ needs and wants and met them in a starkly simple and effective manner.

MEDIACORP’s Response To Shifts In The Pay TV Market

So how have our local FTA channels responded?

Well, MediaCorp is under no illusions about what it is up against. It knows that it has to do better to meet its viewer’s preferences. Linear programming is the first bugbear it has to deal with. And it has attempted to do so by introducing an OTT service called Toggle, where all its FTA channels together with selected Channel 5 and Channel 8’s older series, are available for viewers.

The services, which are free, are branded as Catch-up TV (catch up on TV shows that you have missed on MediaCorp ) and The MediaCorp Collection (older series and dramas from the MediaCorp library).

For paid content, the service is called Toggle Prime, where you have to pay a subscription fee depending on the duration of the contract – monthly, 6 months or 12 months.

Toggle is available on any internet-enabled device and with its Catch-Up TV and on-demand paid content, it has effectively answered the question of linear programming by making use of technology to offer some flexibility to viewers in terms of watching shows at their own time. However, once you start comparing features like ad free content, short-term contracts with fuss free termination and pricing, then it becomes difficult to compete against the likes of Netflix.

Credit: http://www.toggle.sg/en

But there is one other important factor – content. Are viewers drawn to the content on offer on Toggle? What is the differentiating factor that will urge audiences to watch content on Toggle? To be sure, this is not a zero sum game, whereby the choice between Toggle and Netflix or between Toggle and StarHub or Singtel Mio, is one which is mutually exclusive. Content and the ease of accessibility of that content will decide who watches what on which service.

BUILDING A Content Library That Is Original Versus Licensing Content

Going by estimates from industry watchers, there are around 300-350 thousand unique visitors to the Toggle site each month and about 30-35 thousand visitors each day as of the end of 2015.

Toggle’s content library is less impressive and nowhere near the breadth of variety that Netflix offers, especially when we consider English language content from the U.S., including the latest Hollywood TV series and movies. However, if we were to consider local content and especially Chinese language content and drama series, then Toggle becomes a slightly more compelling proposition.

This constant battle to manage content so that viewers stay engaged and perceive that they are getting value for their money, is what sustains the business model.

Just to underline how important content is to Netflix, Hastings announced that US$5 billion will be spent just this year alone on original content. That is a massive amount of money and Netflix is doing it because it realises that having a strong content library that is your own is a long term asset that can generate revenues for a long time in the foreseeable future with little acquisition and licensing costs.

Netflix already has the experience of producing award-winning original content which has whet its appetite to do more of the same. Just look at these titles – Orange Is The New Black, House of Cards, Arrested Development and Star Wars: The Clone Wars (the last 2 being previously cancelled series) and the award winning documentary, The Square (2013).

Interestingly, Toggle is also paying heed to this strategy and planning to release a slate of 11 original programmes targeting younger viewers within the next 2 years.

Aside from the original content strategy, Netflix uses the advances made in big data analytics to personalise the offerings for its customers. Crucial data collected from their customers will be translated into interesting and relevant recommendations and content offerings on their customers’ homepage.

Personalisation Of Content Is No More A Pipe Dream
Credit: Victorio Marasigan
https://www.flickr.com/photos/scrufidog/

Consequently, advertisers who want to reach out to customers on their homepage, will be able to do so in a more targetted manner. So offering ad-free content and depending solely on subscriptions for revenue is not as much a negative factor for Netflix as it may have been years ago, due mainly to the advances made by data analytics.

To sum up, the disruption phenomenon will always be with us. It acts as a catalyst for greater innovation in the marketplace. The winners in the marketplace of today will always be the players who are sensitive to the needs of customers and willing to design products and services which make use of technology to offer a value added proposition. Netflix has done it in a refreshingly direct and simple manner. Fuss-free, flexible and freedom of choice with a clear idea of which market segment it is servicing. Clarity in service identity, compelling content,  simple and unfettered access and exit to content on multiple devices. Seems like a winner to me alright. What do you think?

3 +1 Things To Note For SG GE 2015

1 September 2015 was Nomination Day and what a day to kick off the hustings in Singapore Elections 2015. After all nominations papers were filed MediaCorp’s Channel News Asia then aired a “live” telecast of a forum featuring 7 candidates from 6 political parties – 2 from PAP (Ms Denise Phua & Mr Lawrence Wong) and 1 each from the Reform Party (Mr Kenneth Jeyaretnam),  National Solidarity Party (Mr Lim Tean), Singapore Democratic Party (Dr Chee Soon Juan), Singaporeans First Party (Mr Tan Jee Say) and  the Workers’ Party (Mr Perera Leon Anil).

There are at least a couple of firsts in this elections. For the first time, all 29 electoral divisions will be contested. This is also the first elections in the post-Lee Kuan Yew era and it does seem a little odd not having him around either at the rallies or on TV giving his assessments of PAP candidates and how he thinks PAP will fare against the opposition.

But viewing the “live” telecast of the forum on Tuesday (1 Sept 15), it soon became apparent to me that 3 main issues could most likely define this elections and possibly how the electorate could vote. 

• 1. Immigration and its attendant challenges 

It became quite clear after the opening statements from the 6 opposition party reps that immigration is THE issue which will get more than its fair share of airing in this elections. The influx of foreigners has been linked, if not directly blamed, for a host of other heartaches – lack of job opportunities, low wages, over-crowded MRT trains, high housing prices, inadequate essential infrastructure to deal with increase in foreigners, higher stress levels, etc. The PAP representatives did their best to explain the need for foreigners but it was met with firm riposte from opposition party reps.

The Marsiling-Yew Tee contest between PAP and SDP

• 2. Track Record vs Policies For The Future

The PAP wants voters to judge them by their track record or what it terms, the report card, detailing all that they have achieved for the people of Singapore on things like health insurance (MediShield Life), wages for lower income and older workers (Workfare Income Supplement), housing (the various policies to increase supply and cap rising prices), securing jobs and being industry ready (SkillsFuture, a national initiative to encourage tertiary students to acquire industry skills through apprenticeships and Earn & Learn programmes), etc. The WP rep questioned if this is really the best way to judge how worthy a party is of the electorate’s vote as a report card is by its very nature, retrospective. The WP would prefer looking at future policies and initiatives which the party wants to implement as more effective in garnering support and votes as they give a glimpse of how lives of people will be affected.

• 3. Local Municipal Matters vs Representing People’s Views In Parliament 

The PAP wants voters to judge them both on how the MPs have run the town councils as well as their performance in parliament, in being the voice of the people. The opposition parties appear to place more importance in the latter, in better representing the people’s concerns and establishing more debate before bills are being passed in parliament. In these aspects, the PAP is the very antithesis of the opposition parties, maintaining that greater opposition numbers in parliament is no guarantee for better policies. The PAP holds that most people are more concerned about municipal issues and how well their townships are run because these issues directly impact on their everyday lives.

SDP Rally at Choa Chu Kang Stadium on 3 Sep 2015

And finally, the character of the candidate especially where it concerns honesty and integrity. While I feel this is not a key election issue, I do acknowledge that it will hover like a fog over the entire duration of this elections. The SDP has called for clean electioneering and for all parties to steer away from name-calling and gutter politics. The PAP, on the other hand, while supporting the call for clean electioneering, has reserved its rights on calling out on any candidate it feels has fallen short of its high standards of integrity – something that it obviously feels all Singaporeans have the right to know before they vote.

About a week to go before the people go to the polls and a truly exciting hustings can be expected over the weekend.

And to end off this post, I chanced upon this website where you can find out details of the schedule of all the rallies and view videos of the rallies if you were unable to attend them personally. Alternatively you can check out Toggle.

Robin Williams – Actor, Comedian, Father, Friend & Humanitarian

I will remember 11 Aug 2014 forever but for a less than joyous or celebratory reason. It is the day one of my most favourite actors and comedians, Robin Williams, took his own life in his home in the San Francisco Bay area. Robin took his own life hanging himself using his belt. Robin was 63.

I still remember the shock and disbelief I felt upon hearing the news from my colleague when I reached the office. I found myself desperately searching the newswires for more updates, all the while hoping that it was untrue. Images of Robin and his quirky, zany antics and exploits on camera and the uncontrollable laughter he drew from his mesmerised audience, kept running through my mind. How was it possible for a man who gave us so much joy and laughter and who seemed so happy doing so, suffer so much pain and anguish in his private life, driving him to commit suicide? Why did a man who brought so much joy to so many people, feel so alone and desperate, fighting his own demons that he was not able to find reassurance, comfort and solace in someone, anyone close to him?

Initial reports suggest that Robin suffered from depression. But his wife, Susan Schneider, was quick to say that Robin was in full control of his mental faculties in the time leading to his death. Robin had fought several bouts of depression and alcoholism before. There were some reports that also suggested that he had been diagnosed with early stages of Parkinson’s Disease, just before his untimely death.

Source: The Reel Life Wisdom

Robin Williams got his first shot at stardom in the 1970s TV comedy series Mork & Mindy, where he played the alien, Mork from the planet Ork. The series gave me the first glimpse of his improv genius that has become his trademark and acknowledged by most people in the industry as being unparalleled. Robin took improvisation to new heights probably never to be surpassed. Thoughts and ideas generated at lightning speed and strung together in unimaginable fashion. They maybe seemingly unrelated but Robin gives them new life and meaning in both hilariously funny lines and sometimes poetic lithesome prose. He was an unbridled explosion of visual, physical and verbal comedy bringing together all his previous skill and experience in theatre and as a stand-up and mime artist.

Robin used to say, “You’re only given a little spark of madness. You mustn’t lose it.” Not only did Robin not lose this spark, he lived it.

Check out the video clip below which highlights this improv maestro at his dizzying best.

Robin Williams, The Improv Genius – Source – Time.com

Some of his performances in comedy that stood out for me were Popeye (1980), Good Morning Vietnam (1987) and Mrs Doubtfire (1993).

But there was more to his irrepressible comedic talent. He was also a dramatic actor who could speak to the inner depths of your soul. Some of my favourite Robin William movies were the ones where he played dramatic characters.  Dead Poets Society (1989) is one where he plays the protagonist, an English teacher who inspires his students through poetry and the other is Good Will Hunting (1997) where he plays a therapist to a troubled youth on parole who is also an unrecognised genius. Robin won the Oscar for Best Supporting Actor for this role.

Robin not only inspired people with his acting and comedy but also his philanthrophy.  He volunteered a lot of his time to many charities often bringing cheer to the poor, homeless, sick and U.S. troops stationed in bases abroad.

His words or the lines he spoke in movies are legendary and are truly inspirational to people from all walks of life – students, teachers, politicians, managers, captains of industry.

One of my favourite quotes is “No matter what people tell you, words and ideas can change this world.” Those words certainly ring true for Robin who found fame and fortune in the entertainment industry which showcased his acting prowess and verbal dexterity.

Here are some more memorable quotes from Robin, courtesy of Entrepreneur.com.

Source: Entrepreneur.Com

 

 

U.S. President Barack Obama’s touching tribute to Robin probably encapsulates so sweetly what Robin Williams means to all of us. “Robin Williams was an airman, a doctor, a genie, a nanny, a president, a professor, a bangarang Peter Pan and everything in between. But he was one of a kind. He arrived in our lives as an alien – but he ended up touching every element of the human spirit.”

 

Robin Williams  – rest in peace…

 

 

 

Pay TV Viewership of World Cup 2014 – A Public Good?

Next month, the fever generated from the irrepressible, hip-gyrating inducing samba music accompanying the soccer festival in Brazil, the host of the month-long World Cup 2014, will infect Singaporeans, soccer fans and non-soccer fans alike.  

Embed from Getty Images

#492325859 / gettyimages.com

Central to the recent debate on the TV coverage of the quadrennial World Cup 2014 matches is the price at which the coverage is made available to sports fans, at least as far as the soccer fan is concerned.

That is not surprising because coverage of such a popular sport in Singapore should be made accessible to as many TV viewers as possible at a reasonable and affordable price. The World Cup (WC) will be held in Brazil from 12 June – 13 July 2014.

Singtel managed to secure exclusive rights from FIFA, the world soccer governing body, to broadcast all the matches. Singtel outflanked local rival StarHub with this move which StarHub protested as ungentlemanly, given its earlier offer to Singtel to do a joint bid to secure exclusive rights (Singtel and StarHub had submitted a last minute joint bid to secure broadcast rights for WC 2010). But Singtel had other ideas.

Singtel’s move was strategic as it wanted to enhance shareholder value by securing future revenue streams via more subscriptions through its “sign up for 2 years and get free WC viewing” promotion. While you cannot fault a corporate entity to go for the jugular in the competitive war against its rivals in the pay TV market, you do feel for the average Singaporean consumer, who looks to be a little more than a victim of collateral damage.

The price of the non-promotional WC package is $112, easily one of the highest in the world. Countries where residents get to watch the WC for free include Australia, Britain, Norway, China, South Korea, Japan, Thailand, Indonesia and Cambodia. Comparing with countries which do charge a fee, our consumers come out looking very disadvantaged as well. WC package costs S$38.40 in Malaysia , $6 in Denmark and $21 in HK. So what can our industry regulators do to ensure greater equity in the market for consumers?

Price is just the symptom of the shortfalls of our local Pay TV market mechanism. The bigger issue is whether WC coverage as well as the coverage of big sporting events like the Olympics, Asian Games and Commonwealth Games, should be viewed as public goods? And if they are, would it be fair then to allow the price of these public goods to be determined by free market mechanism which inherently disregards social and community benefits from its pricing mechanism?

Second Minister for Communications and Information Mr Lawrence Wong, has said that the latitude for price negotiation is pretty tight given that the WC content owner, FIFA, is the price setter and holds significant bargaining power. FIFA can just choose not to sell the rights if pay TV operators cannot meet its price. So it appears that Singapore is at the mercy of FIFA whenever WC comes around. But can we not do something to tackle this price challenge so that our consumers are not disadvantaged to the extent they are at the moment?

#182684954 / gettyimages.com

Mr Wong says Public Service Broadcast (PSB) funds are used to secure the broadcast rights of top level sports content like Olympics, Asian Games and Commonwealth Games. The fact that the coverage of these sports events are funded by PSB funds, provides some justification for supporting the argument to treat the WC in the same way i.e. as a public good which is deserving of public funding, if not wholly, at least in part. On the Ministry of Communications and Information website it is stated that   “Public Service Broadcast (PSB) programmes play an important role in fostering a cohesive and informed society, as well as to celebrate our shared identity”.

Part of this effort to foster a more “cohesive and informed society” would be initiatives to create more common spaces and understanding between Singapore-born and bred citizens and foreigners/new citizens.  The quadrennial WC is a sporting event which has high public interest and following. Singapore, a global city state with many foreigners of different nationalities living and working here, should welcome the WC as an opportunity to educate its citizens about the culture and unique lifestyles of ordinary people from the various nations that maybe competing in the WC. This serves to strengthen our bonds with the new migrants and foreigners, while giving them an opportunity to know Singaporeans better through a common currency – love for football.

It maybe be argued that this public interest justification to fund WC coverage is already met by putting 4 key WC matches in the anti-siphoning list, as provided for in the Media Market Conduct Code.

The anti-siphoning list draws up a list of sporting events like the World Cup, whose broadcast rights should not be exclusively acquired by pay TV providers and must be available for free-to-air (FTA) broadcasters to acquire, namely MediaCorp. Examples of other sporting events include Olympics, SEA Games and Asian Games and all matches in which the Singapore national team is playing as part of the World Cup.

Embed from Getty Images

#468721231 / gettyimages.com

So placing a sporting event in the anti-siphoning list does not make it free. It still has to be acquired at a price by MediaCorp either exclusively or from  either of the 2 pay TV providers through a sub-licensing agreement.

However, the 4 key matches (opening day match, 2 semi-final matches and final) which will be broadcast on a FTA channel in MediaCorp, also compares poorly with what is on offer by other territories. Malaysia and Denmark offer 32 matches and Hong Kong offers 22 matches in their FTA channels.

Perhaps in the impending review of the cross carriage and anti-siphoning provisions under the Code, regulators could explore the feasibility of adding on more matches into the anti-siphoning list.

So under a scenario whereby pay TV operators continue to bid competitively for the WC broadcast rights, the anti-siphoning list could be increased from the current 4 matches to 9 (or more), to include the quarter-final matches as well as the 3rd place match.

However, regulators could institute a requirement by the pay TV operators to secure the broadcast rights well ahead of the event, say a year in advance. An early deadline could give pay TV operators more time to sell WC promotional packages, develop more creative content leading up to the WC which will in turn draw more sponsors and advertisers.

The successful bidder (after being appointed as a commissioning broadcaster) could initiate a call for proposal to commission an ancillary sports-infotainment content (which will run in tandem with the main live match coverage) under the auspices of the PSB Contestable Fund Scheme (PCFS). This content should be available on multiple platforms thus increasing reach and generating more viral marketing opportunities.

Under the current PCFS rules, MediaCorp will have exclusive broadcast licence  to the PCFS funded programme for up to one year. MediaCorp can then air the programme together with the 9 acquired “live” matches under the anti-siphoning list. This will generate advertising and sponsorship revenue from which will help MediaCorp offset the cost of acquisition of the “live” matches under a sub-licensing agreement with the successful bidder/pay TV operator.

Singapore Pools which earns money from betting on WC matches, could be persuaded to “give back” to the community by increasing its subsidies for Singaporeans wanting to watch the WC. MediaCorp could work with Singapore Pools in this respect to explore how this could be done. Perhaps a sports viewership fund of sorts could be set up to which Singapore Pools could contribute yearly and from which MediaCorp could draw from to support its purchase of the rights to air WC matches in the anti-siphoning list. In return, Singapore Pools could receive first rights for sponsorship of the programme assuming sponsorship rules are met.

Embed from Getty Images

#165657961 / gettyimages.com

The advantages of this proposed plan of action is that viewers get to see more of the key matches “live” on FTA TV (MediaCorp) and the free market principles of the competitive bidding for WC broadcast rights by private pay TV companies are respected. Also while possibly more public funds maybe used by MediaCorp to pay for the sub-licensing fee for the key matches, this is minimised as far as possible by its access to the proposed viewership fund. Another positive knock-on effect is that the standard of Singapore TV production in general gets a boost.

One possible setback is pay TV operators will have to continually face the prospects of higher bids in order to secure the WC rights. But this is ameliorated by more time available for securing advertisers and sponsors.

Another possible plan of action would simply be for all the main parties, Singtel, StarHub and MediaCorp, to proceed with a private-public joint-bidding exercise to secure the WC rights within a clearly stated deadline. The regulators need to make a strong “public good” argument for this proposal to take hold and gain currency among the pay TV operators. This is not just because a larger sum of money maybe required from the PSB fund for MediaCorp to do this but also to counter possible criticism that free market principles have been compromised with the submission of the joint bid by 3 separate entities.

Creative solutions can be negotiated on how the pie is divided among the 3 corporate entities in terms of advertising and sponsorship revenues with MDA playing the role of facilitator to ensure overall fairness in the negotiations.

In conclusion, I believe the time has come for some concrete measures to be taken to deal decisively with the issue of the cost of viewing WC matches in Singapore. And it starts by recognising what value the WC could potentially bring for us Singaporeans which goes far beyond economic benefits. I’m afraid when it comes to WC TV viewership, there are good arguments to treat it as a public good which would justify some form of mandated regulation in order to tackle unfettered price increases in future. Viva la Football!!

Here’s the People’s Association’s World Cup Screening Schedule at all the various community clubs in Singapore.

Contrasting Reception for Multiple Award Winner “Ilo Ilo” From Local and Overseas Markets

When Ilo Ilo won the prestigious Camera d’Or prize at the Cannes Film Festival in May this year, I was pleasantly surprised. This was a film made by a Singaporean film-maker, Anthony Chen (and a Ngee Ann Polytechnic alumnus) – his first feature film about a heartland family living through the 1997 Asian economic crisis with their Filipino maid.

Members of the arts community here and Singaporeans in general, celebrated this win.

Anthony Chen Wins The Camera d’Or at Cannes for his film Ilo Ilo

Chen’s recent win of four awards including Best Picture and Best New Director at Taiwan’s Golden Horse awards (Chinese moviedom’s equivalent of the Oscars), surprised a few critics including Chen himself.

Some people even called it a turning point for Singapore cinema and film industry.

But is it really?

Don’t get me wrong. I am delighted that a Singapore film has finally achieved the recognition it deserves at the highest level globally. Ilo Ilo was produced with a budget of about $700,000, supported financially by a Singapore Film Commission funding scheme and Chen’s alma mater, Ngee Ann Polytechnic.

This is a film that was devoid of all the traits of a Hollywood blockbuster and targeted at the average Singaporean viewer neither is it a true blue arthouse movie. It did not have a big name star neither was it infused with a good dosage of slapstick comedy which Singaporeans seem to lap up. There was no romantic leading man or lady because there was no romantic sub-plot in the narrative.

What it has, though, is some straight shooting, honest to goodness story-telling without the usual drama and twists that we come to expect of films that generally do well at the box office.

A scene from the movie Ilo Ilo

When I thought about this more deeply, I figured how very Singaporean this film was, in every sense of the word. I mean not just because it was made by a Singaporean but also how it was made (budget wise) and how the narrative was kept simple and honest to reflect the filmmaker’s own childhood experience. Chen fought the temptation to resort to gimmicks in order to “spice” up the script just so that it will be more commercial.

It was almost like Chen set out to dress up an autobiographical documentary and parade it as a film. But don’t people go to the movies to suspend their disbelief and be transported to a world that they rarely go into? Or am I just being boringly predictable in terms of what movie-goers really want.

This is where I started to draw some parallels between Ilo Ilo and Singapore. If you were to think of Singapore and how it regularly punches above it’s weight-class in the global political arena, you begin to see some similarities between Ilo Ilo’s string of film awards and Singapore.

Singapore is often seen as a clean and efficient city state where everything works and where we are a hub or centre of excellence for commerce, finance education, etc. Honesty and integrity in government are not just buzzwords but ferverntly pursued and upheld to the highest order.

I could’nt help but feel that Chen took a leaf from the Singapore book on governance, in terms of how he stuck to the things that he felt reflected truthfully his growing up years.

He felt that these were things that Singaporeans could and should relate to as well.

But the box office takings of Sing$1.2 million after a couple of months on 15 prints is not exactly a ringing endorsement from Singapore’s movie-goers. Going by industry estimates, Ilo Ilo has to top $2.1 million just to break even.

By contrast, Jack Neo’s army comedy sequel, Ah Boys To Men 2, became the top grossing local film of all time, garnering $7.9 million at the box office. This was a film made on a budget of about $1.5 million.

Conversely, Ilo Ilo was more successful than Ah Boys in terms of sales to overseas markets. It has already sold in 20 territories abroad which could prove vital in not just ensuring the film breaks even but perhaps also making a modest profit. The movie is doing especially well in France where it grossed 600,000 Euros and is getting good reviews in Taiwan. Gross revenue so far is an impressive $3 million as a result of these overseas box office takings.

Whatever it is, Ilo Ilo has certainly put Singapore on the world map in terms of what our filmmakers can do, small budget, notwithstanding. Chen’s unprecedented wins at Cannes and Taiwan will spur future filmmakers to pursue their craft, open the doors to international markets for future Singaporean filmmakers and maybe, just maybe, embolden financial institutions to support their creative pursuits.

Ilo Ilo wins 4 Golden Horse trophies

ROI or what financiers term return on investment, need not be solely based on dollar terms. Maybe financiers, by definition, are cynics and because of that they cannot look past the dollar sign. But you know what they say about cynics – they know the price of everything and the value of nothing. Singapore, the Little Red Dot, can certainly appreciate the value of Chen’s achievement.

Netizens Square Up Against Big Brother

My friends and I were just talking over tea the other day, about the U.S. Government surveillance leaks by a U.S. defence contractor where he revealed that the National Security Agency (NSA), monitored phone call and internet data from technology companies like Google, Facebook and Apple.

The defence contractor and ex-CIA man, Mr Edward Snowdon, is now seeking asylum somewhere in Hong Kong, according to media reports, as U.S. Justice Department prepares to indict him on possible charges of treason.

I remarked to my friends over tea how easy it must be now, in the post-911 era,  for security agencies to monitor anyone even without the complicit help of technology  companies.

With the explosion of social media and social networks, people are increasingly sharing their private lives on a platform that is practically public, at least in so far as how easily the information can be accessed or transferred to the public domain.

The amount of time spent in these virtual spaces has also risen sharply.  The global average internet user spends 32 minutes a day on the internet of which 22% or roughly a fifth of which is spent on social networking (Source: http://www.go-gulf.com/blog/online-time).

In Singapore, a Singapore Polytechnic study revealed that youths here (aged 15 -35), spent 5.5 hours a day online in 2012 (up from 4.8 in 2011) and most of the time was spent on “social” activities like reading content, watching videos, replying or commenting on posts and chatting or sharing with friends.

Singaporeans are also among the world’s heaviest users of social media, chiefly Facebook.

Gone are the days when people guarded their privacy jealously or so it seems. Now it appears that the more you share, the more hip you are and the more popular you will be within your social network.

This should surely make it easier to track someone’s background, which school the person went to, the person’s circle of friends, his or her hobbies, where the person went for holidays, who are his/her family members, where the person works, etc., etc.. In short, a treasure trove for government security and surveillance agencies.

Do people even know that all the information they happily post on social media sites can be tracked and monitored and if they do, do they even care?

Right now, the success of these sites seems to suggest that people in general may be aware that they can be monitored but they are just not bothered by it.

But if this is true then it raises another question – are our online identities and personalities and the real world ones in sync? Are they one and the same or are they markedly different? Do we have split personalities when we straddle the virtual and the real worlds?

The reason I ask these questions is because I feel that generally I think people conduct themselves differently in the online space when compared to the real world space. In the real world we are taught not to talk to strangers or share our personal details with them. We are more guarded, more wary, more circumspect of people and of what we hear from them about things in general.

But in the social media space, we seem all too happy to shed our cloak of distrust and let our guards down. We take risks that we would not normally do in the real world. We would not mind “friending” someone on Facebook even if s/he was not a true friend but merely an acquaintance. We don’t mind sharing every little detail of our lives online. You see, in the social media space it was important to be popular and have the most number of friends and get the most number of likes to every post that you make. That’s the engine that drives these networks.

Now this online behaviour or persona that we take on simply plays into the hands of security and government agencies, does’nt it? It makes it easier for these agencies to track or monitor someone.

Its not just security agencies that are going to social media these days to check up on individuals. Companies and job placement & talent search agencies do routine checks on job applicants this way. Students check up on their teachers. Colleagues check up on the co-workers. We all do our own small clandestine background checks of people in the secure confines of our homes at one time or another, don’t we?

But the recent Snowdon-U.S. security leak  scandal goes beyond the legal boundaries as regarded by American citizens because the NSA got the complicity of the major U.S. tech giants to access their servers thus compromising the privacy of people’s personal data.

But should the loss of privacy be the price that Americans should pay for more security in America? And this price be justified? Is it equitable? Is this an equitable price for any citizen from any country to pay?

I’m sure going by the online backlash that the Obama Administration is getting since the scandal broke will suggest that the answer to the latter 3 questions is an emphatic “No”.

But this is a national conversation that Americans need to have with the government and both sides need to be aware that whatever they decide, a price will have to paid, no matter what.

A high level of security which assumes that acts of terror will be at the minimum, will exact a high price on internet privacy, meaning people should be prepared for a low level of individual privacy on the Net.

It does not help the cause of security agencies when someone as iconic as the founder of the World Wide Web, Sir Tim Berners-Lee, said that sinister forces are working to control the Internet at the Ernst & Young Entrepreneur of the Year competition in Monte Carlo.

Berners-Lee said “companies and governments in different places all over the world trying to take control of the Internet in different ways” is a much bigger threat to its development than fears over any one company having an online monopoly.

But lest we forget, here’s a reminder for all netizens. A matchbox in the hands of a child or a pyromaniac, almost surely will result in disaster. A tool is an amoral, lifeless thing. It is the person using the tool that decides how s/he wants to use it. So it is with the Internet.

If an entity seeks to “control” the Internet for a broader social good (like better national security), then I say, why not just have an open mind to see how it could be done so that it does not infringe on one’s individual rights too much?

This has to be a discussion with both sides of the privacy rights issue (netizens vs security agencies/government) sitting down to iron out the legal boundaries on what can or cannot be done.

But if this is not an viable option and netizens demand privacy of all their personal data and information on the Net at all costs, then I highly recommend that they harmonize and unify their online and offline identities and behaviours.

In short, only reveal on social media and on the Net what you are prepared to do so in real life. And make sure that your virtual persona and behaviour is no different from who you are in real life.

That way, any security breach compromising personal info will not cause too much alarm as it was info that the individual had shared with the full knowledge that full privacy is not guaranteed.

And if all else fails, then there is always 11 September 2001 to give us all some perspective on this issue.

Write Your Own Happy Story

Last Friday was the graduation ceremony for graduates from the School of Film & Media Studies (FMS), Ngee Ann Polytechnic.

Many of these graduates were from the Mass Communication diploma course and had taken the module I teach, Media Business Management. Additionally  my internship team and I had helped many of them find internship places to fulfill their final year requirement for a 6-month work attachment.

The realization that a significant milestone was reached called for a celebration especially after much hard work, endless deadlines and constant worries about putting in work that impressed the lecturers and industry partners.

Photo – courtesy of Farez Juraimi

And FMS students don’t need lessons on how to celebrate. There was much joy, laughter and candid posing for that memorable photo with peers, friends and family.

As Director of FMS, Ms Anita Kuan, said in her stirring graduation speech peppered with Hollywood inspired humour, these students will go on to achieve more milestones in their lives ad infinitum.

And as this year’s valedictorian, Keziah Quek, urged her graduating class in her speech, FMS students will not need a second prompting to write their own script for a happy life and not just a successful one.

Several of the graduates I had the chance to meet after the graduation ceremony told me of their next milestone, gaining entry into university. Others secured full-time employment, some, I am delighted to say, in companies that they interned at.

Even others were taking a break to mull over what their next milestone should be, which I felt, was a really wise thing to do when one reaches a cross-road as important as this one in their lives.

Whatever it is,  it is my hope that these graduates embark on journeys to write wonderful, inspiring and happy stories of their own lives because they deserve it. Because they can. Because they owe it to their parents who supported them all this while.

I would like to share this really awe inspiring video clip of Britain’s Got Talent which showcases in a dramatic and moving way, what passion, sacrifice, determination and the unflinching faith in the values that are dear to you can do to help you achieve the milestone of your dreams. Watch and be wowed! (Click on the Watch on Youtube link)

What Defines You?

Early last month, before the new academic year began I received the sad news that one of my students, a petite 18 year old girl, had contracted cancer. She had just completed her 2nd Year and was looking forward to start her 6-month internship in the new semester.

I met her distraught father to help initiate the administrative process needed to defer her studies till she gets better. It is always heart-breaking to hear about people, especially people who are near and dear to you, who are stricken with the scourge of cancer. Recent medical and bio-technological advances have made huge strides in the fight against cancer, improving the survival rates significantly, but often this is still scant consolation for those stricken with the disease and to their loved ones.

This latest reminder of the fragility of life, that everyday is a gift which one should treasure and cherish was especially sobering for me. It made me think of my father and how he worked so hard all his life so much so that when he retired, he seemed to have lost his raison d’etre and appeared displaced and confused about post-retirement life.

It reminded me of a question a management trainer asked of me? “What defines you?” And one of the things I said was my work defines me.

But the critical question, especially after this latest news about my student, is, “Does your work define you solely as a person or a human being?”

I hope the answer is a negative and it should be a resounding negative. Men, especially, feel their self-worth and their standing in society is a function of their achievements and success at work. But it is indeed a very sad day when society uses this as the sole gauge of how good a human being someone is.

A person is still someone’s sister or brother, someone’s mother or father, someone’s spouse and someone’s friend and not just someone’s boss or colleague. And that’s how, I feel, we should all be remembered by those around us, as a whole person who has a life outside of work.

I also began to think about the causes of cancer and it is a well-known fact that stress is one of the chief contributing factors. This brings us back to our jobs and our workplace.

Is all the stress at work really worth it?

Let us first be upfront about one thing. I am not proposing that all workplaces should be stress-free zones. That would not be possible. Stress can be a good thing up to a certain point because it encourages us to push beyond the boundaries, to continually do better and improve.

Media professionals often talk about how the media and communications industry is one of the most stressful in the world today. Well, having spent 14 years in the media industry, I can vouch for that sentiment. But I’ll be quick to add that stress is not the sole preserve of media industry.

Just ask former Lehman Brothers CFO, Ms Erin Callan. She wrote a brutally honest opinion piece in The New York Times entitled, Is There Life After Work?

In the article she lamented not LIVING her life to the fullest and making work the centre of her life. This meant putting all else, including her family, friends, husband and marriage second to her work. Not surprisingly her marriage ended at about the time that the 2008 financial crisis struck U.S. markets causing the collapse of Lehman Brothers. Callan resigned just months before the collapse.

She wrote, “…when I left my job, it devastated me. I couldn’t just rally and move on. I did not know how to value who I was versus what I did. What I did was who I was.”

In Callan’s case, she left her job following financial collapse of the markets decimated her company. But how much worse is it if you are forced out due to an incurable disease like cancer? You see what terminal illnesses like cancer do to you is to strip you of all your worldly possessions and of all the things that are not of any importance to you and re-focuses your mind on the people and things that are truly important and which bring you genuine happiness.

Callan’s thoughts were echoed chillingly by the late Linds Redding, an art director at advertising companies BBDO and Saatchi & Saatchi. Redding died of esophageal cancer at the age of 52 in October 2012 after spending years as a successful advertising executive. Cancer was a wake-up call, a dark epiphany that suddenly put his life into proper perspective. It was an especially heart-wrenching moment when  he learnt that the cancer was inoperable from his doctor .

He wrote a visceral blog entitled “A Short Lesson In Perspective” which became viral in the aftermath of his death especially among creative executives in the advertising industry. In the blog, he lambasted his former colleagues for sacrificing precious times and occasions with family and friends for the sake of work by calling them “f*****g mad”, “Deranged” and “So disengaged from reality it’s not even funny.”

He further labelled the advertising industry a scam and a con; the con being that the industry forces you to believe that there is nothing more important than the client brief and the work involved whether it is a TV commercial or more elaborate ad campaign. That this work somehow gives more meaning to one’s life than anything else.

Of course readers of his blog say that his chilling rant is applicable to other industries and the problem of placing work above all else is something many of us are guilty of.

But it is up to us to recognize that life is not all about work and that having a good work-life balance is actually healthy for optimal work performance.

It is about coming to terms with the realities in the work-place concerning taking on additional work responsibilities, bonuses, promotions and weighing these against being a good spouse, a responsible and loving parent and a filial son or daughter.

In Singapore, we have our own Linds Redding in the late Dr Richard Teo, who gave up a promising career in the public sector as an ophthalmologist to become an aesthetic surgeon. He died of lung cancer at the relatively young age of 40. He gave his own account of the meaning of life and what it means to be successful and happy in a powerful and sobering Youtube video. (Note: video is a little grainy and has poor sound quality).

Singapore – Why So Serious?

Do Singaporeans take themselves too seriously and lack the ability to laugh at themselves?

Are we so self-absorbed, moody, prudish and so focused in chasing our dreams that we forget to take some time off to chill out and smell the roses?

When I raised this with my friends, some of them replied that Singapore is not the place to “chill” and “smell the roses” but to make money while you can.

We seem to be on a treadmill where we are constantly thinking of earning more money, buying our dream home or car, getting a degree and so on and so forth. Have we forgotten the little things that make life beautiful and liveable? Have we become too serious for our own good?

I ask these questions in the light of some recent news that made our headlines in both mainstream and social media.

The first is the news about a Gallup survey that said Singaporeans are the most unhappy people in the world, more correctly, the least likely to report having positive emotions. The survey polled 148 countries and Singapore fared worse than Haiti, Afghanistan and even Syria, where there is currently a rebellion.

By the way, Panama ranked number one, as the country with the most people who report having positive emotions. The Latin American countries fared very well in this survey, taking 8 out of the top 10 places.

In a similar Gallup poll last year, Singaporeans were also ranked as the least emotional people in world i.e. people who showed the least emotion, either positive or negative. Filipinos were judged to be the most emotional.

I think concert organizers, emcees and “live” show hosts may nod their heads furiously in agreement with the latter seeing how difficult it is to get spontaneous applause from a Singaporean crowd.

There were a spate of other related media events which seem to question the Singaporean threshold for pranks, parodies and satires.

One of them was the Ken Kwek’s film, Sex.Violence.Family Values. The Media Development Authority (MDA) banned the film because one of the 3 short comedic stories which the film was made up of, was racially sensitive. This was later overturned by the Films Appeals Committee and the film was given a R21 rating with edits.

Film enthusiasts and local proponents of greater creative freedom of expression in the arts applaud the move because they feel the film uses satire to highlight a social ill – racism.

Then there was the termination of The Married Men’s increasingly popular morning radio show on Hot 91.3FM.

The show’s popular prank segment called “Kena Pluck” backfired when a listener complained about the DJs going too far in carrying out the prank . The lady who was pranked had applied to do an early childhood degree in a foreign university and the DJs pretended to be consulate officials who were doing a background check on her to ascertain if she was “eligible” to do the course.

They asked her if she hit children to which she denied doing so. The DJs then advised her that it was OK to hit children from poor families because they lacked the financial muscle to sue her in court.

The DJs then asked her if she was willing to do “favours” in order to get her visa application approved, something that is politically sensitive given all the media publicity surrounding government officials caught in sex-for-favours corruption cases.

Fans of The Married Men were obviously unhappy and a Facebook appeal against the ban is currently ongoing. Some of fans actually asked people to “chill” and to not take life so seriously. Sound familiar?

I started thinking about this a little more deeply. I know that there were some people who feel that the “Kena Pluck” segment is not appropriate at all and should never be incorporated into The Married Men’s show.

But if that is so, then why do we have the Just For Laughs – Singapore edition shown on Channel 5? This is basically the Singapore series of the very popular Canadian prank show Just For Laughs. [click on the YouTube logo at the bottom right of the screen].

I think its very funny and some of the pranks are really testing the boundary between humour and humiliation, but those who were pranked always managed to laugh at the end when all is revealed (or maybe it is a case of “what choice do I have?”).

So perhaps it is not so much whether prank segments should be shown or heard in our media but what type of pranks are being played on viewers or listeners. And inherent in this is our ability to manoeuver the OB (out-of-bound) markers i.e. the boundaries that separates what is sensitive (and therefore should not be discussed) and what is not.

Sociologists will tell you that humour is often determined by the cultural context of the area where people live or originate from. Customs, social mores and values determine the thin and often porous boundary between humour and mockery.

Perhaps no other society manifests this dilemma more than the countries in the Middle East.

Can you play a prank on an Arab gentleman or lady without either of them feeling insulted?

We have such a narrow view of the Middle Eastern people’s concept of humour because the popular media stereotypes them as serious, unsmiling, having very strict social rules concerning inter-mixing between men and women.

But Maz Jobrani, an American stand-up comedian of Iranian descent, used this as the subject of his act in Doha, Qatar last year, to great comedic effect. I was certainly entertained as were all the Qatari men and women in the audience.

Check out the TEDTalks video below and you will see how the humour stayed within the safe boundaries of what is acceptable in the Qatari and wider Middle Eastern culture. What I thought was great was the audience was able to laugh at themselves without taking offence because the humour was expertly crafted to suit the audience’s taste.

Humour and laughing at ourselves would not be complete without discussing Mr Alvin Tan and his girlfriend, Ms Vivian Lee. Mr Tan, a Malaysian, was a former ASEAN scholar and final year Law undergraduate at NUS. He had his scholarship terminated for his explicit blogs on sex.

Mr Tan and his girlfriend were unapologetic and proceeded to start their own Youtube channel discussing anything and everything about sex in their own unmistakeably irreverent manner and their own brand of humour.

They feel it is their mission to get Malaysians and Singaporeans to be less prudish and more open about taboo topics like sex and feel more comfortable talking about them.

Some people view their actions as purely fun and harmless. But others feel that they should be socially responsible to their audience and warn them that whatever tips they maybe handing out about sex is only their opinion and should not be taken as expert advice.

Whatever the case maybe, I think Singaporeans, in general, could use a good dose of humour in their lives. It has been medically proven that laughter is the best medicine.

Laughter is contagious. It helps to relieve the stresses in our lives and binds us as a community.

And in the spirit of laughing at ourselves here’s a joke about men (from a woman’s perspective) which my wife and I suspect, many women, just love. And I hope it tickles your funny bone too!

“Men are like fine wine.  They all start out like grapes, and it’s our job to stomp on them and keep them in the dark until they mature into something you’d like to have dinner with.”  Source – http://www.jokes.com/

Masala Too Hot For Singaporean Tastebuds?

[Singapore’s Films Appeals Committee  (FAC) has overturned the MDA ban on a controversial film imposed following a majority call for an NAR (Not Allowed For All Ratings) rating by its Films Consultative Panel. However, the FAC has given the film entitled, Sex.Violence.Family Values, a R21 rating with edits, something that the film director said was not ideal but still better than an outright ban.] – update TODAYonline | Culture & Lifestyle | Movies | Sex.Violence.FamilyValues can be shown with R21 rating.

The recent MDA banning of Ken Kwek’s film, Sex.Violence.Family Values, ignited a furore in the social media space. Many from the creative fields expressed their disappointment and anger that a film with good acting chops and daring enough to tackle issues deemed taboo in Singapore, was given an NAR rating or Not Allowed For All Ratings by MDA after consulting members of its Film Consultative Panel (FCP).

But after reading the many media reports and the social media chatter (some of which were harshly critical of the MDA), I have more questions than answers on the issue of the boundaries of artistic licence and whether Singaporeans are really ready for a no holds barred sort of development of the arts here.

The film’s premiere at Cathay Cineleisure Cineplex on Friday, 5 Oct 2012 was reportedly well received, after initially been given an M18 rating. According to media reports, the ban took effect on Monday, 8 Oct 2012. See the TODAY report TODAYonline | Culture & Lifestyle | Movies | Bitter pill.

Kwek’s film is actually an anthology of 3 short films of which the 2nd one, Porn Masala, was deemed the offending one. In that short film, a crass, uncouth film director played by Adrian Pang works with an Indian actor, played by Vasantham TV star, Vadi PVSS, to make Singapore’s first “arthouse porno”.

One part of Porn Masala, shows Adrian’s character spewing all the wicked stereotypes that one can think of about Indians (some of which emanating from contempt and some from purported ignorance), including classics like using ghee as hair cream, having bad body odour, being alcoholics and wife beaters and being natives of Africa.

The film reaches a climax (pun intended) when Vadi’s character,  is unable to “perform” on the set with a young Chinese girl and incurs the wrath of the film director (Adrian Pang) which leads to Vadi retaliating by hurling racial insults at him and Chinese in general.

Are the authorities afraid that more people will imitate the offensive behaviour of Adrian Pang’s racist character in the film, a case of anti-mimesis or the philosophy which states that Life imitates Art, robustly proposed by 19th century author, Oscar Wilde in his essay The Decay of Lying?

After 47 years of independence and  many more years of history behind us of working and living around people of many races and religions and social backgrounds, are Singaporeans unable to think critically and perceive for themselves the good and bad in a film like Porn Masala? And by extrapolation, may I venture to ask the even bigger question of whether Singapore can grow as a truly global city, embracing modern technology and the creative arts with equal voracity?

All very tough questions but questions that we Singaporeans need to ponder and reflect on seriously if we are supposed to progress as a united country. Perhaps these are questions that the current national initiative, Singapore Conversation, should consider asking citizens

Maybe the socio-political atmosphere in Singapore was just not right for the film to get a public screening licence, following the Amy Cheng saga.

The Minister for Communications and Information, Dr Yaacob Ibrahim, offered some clarifications on the MDA’s reclassification of the film after consultation with the FCP and the appeal process in Parliament on 12 November 2012. His clarifications seem to suggest that filmmakers could be asked to make representations to the FCP in similar cases in future. Please also see TODAYonline | Hot News | Stance on satirical film ‘not a step backwards’.

There are other issues in the film which are controversial (but perhaps less volatile) and which perhaps were not highlighted and not as hotly debated in the media. For example, the part played by the girl in school uniform taking on the role of Vadi’s sex partner in the porn film (in itself a controversial hot topic in Singapore following the indictment of several men for sex with an underaged girl) and the minor but nonetheless important issue of the girl wearing a pinafore which is so easily recognisable as that of a well-known Catholic school in Singapore.

I would not blame the school for taking offense in a such a case because it creates an unfair stereotype affecting all girls who wear the same school uniform. A similar but more serious incident led to schools taking legal advice against a private club for misuse of their school crests . Please read the following news article in TODAY newspaper, TODAYonline | Singapore | Filter Members Club apologises to CHIJ & ACS for use of school crests.

I am not trying to defend MDA’s decision to give a NAR rating to Kwek’s film in this blog. But neither am I fully in support of the vocal creative arts practitioners who were against the rating decision because frankly the issue is so much bigger than the freedom of creative expression and encompasses so many other issues, social, political and even economic.

I am truly sympathetic of Kwek’s plight in that he has to shoulder a substantial economic loss as a result of the ban. But I wonder whether the ban serves as a reminder to filmmakers once again, to develop more skillful and sophisticated techniques in tackling issues of race and religion in their narratives.

Kwek and Pang both reiterated that the film uses satire and parody to attack racism and stereotypes. But satire and parody are not easy techniques to employ in film if they are to be successful especially in the Singapore context. So even though Sacha Baron Cohen and the makers of mockumentary, Borat, were successful in the use of satire, this technique may have to be tweaked for the Singapore audience where it involves a Singaporean narrative.

This is apparent and can be inferred from the article by John Lui in the Sunday Times, “The Canary In The Coal Mine Of Racial Speech”, 14 Oct 2012, where he interviewed Ms Cheryl Ng, Film Consultative Panel member and paraphrased her as saying that it is “hard to remember what you are supposed to be laughing at when the jokes are so mean”.

Lui also said in his article that panel members think that “there will be enough people laughing with Pang’s character” and not at him, to cause offense. It appears from Ms Ng’s response that the Singapore audience may not be sophisticated enough to both understand and fully appreciate satires and parodies, especially in the film format.

So what exactly is the state of our community and inter-racial affairs in Singapore? Editor Warren Fernandez in his weekly Sunday Times commentary dated 14 Oct 2012, entitled “Are We Taking Racial Peace For Granted?” said time and again he was shocked to hear some parents tell their kids not to play with children of some other races as they might be a bad influence. Or others who say that they do not want their child in a certain school because of its racial make-up. Or businessmen who say they will trade only with people like themselves whom they can trust.

I got an interesting insight into the state of inter-racial trust in Singapore when I attended a MediaCorp event recently. At the event, the findings of a MediaCorp research study of youths aged 12 – 29 were released. 

One rather disconcerting finding was that only 67% of the youths surveyed can work with different races. This means 1 in 3 youths surveyed (33%) said they cannot work with people from a different race. That, to me, is a shocking statistic, given the demographic in question (our future leaders)  and given all the government has done and is doing to promote racial harmony in schools, in the workplace and in the community.

So whether Life imitates Art or Art imitates Life, we Singaporeans have a duty to play our part to enhance racial harmony and a truly united community in any way we can, whether it is as a parent or a child at home, or as a boss or a worker in the office or as a filmmaker, writer or an artist.

Should Passion or Pecuniary Interests Guide Career Decisions?

Graduation season has come and gone at the polytechnics here in Singapore. The graduates had a lot to do and the preparations for the big day included getting their graduation gowns, taking loads of photographs with friends, course mates, parents and of course, lecturers.

Amongst the cheerful chatter and congratulatory exchanges between the graduates and their lecturers, the topic that always comes up without fail is “What next?”, as if the academic expedition that the graduates have just completed was not grueling enough.

But one Ngee Ann Polytechnic (NP) graduate raised the heat on the passion vs pecuniary debate (at least on the Net), when she turned down (politely of course) the Ngee Ann Kongsi Award, which is a generous bond-free scholarship given to the polytechnic’s top graduate.

Ms Tok Kheng Leng, a 3.99 GPA biomedical engineering graduate, turned down the NP award to take a NUS Global Merit scholarship to pursue a social work degree. Ms Tok enjoyed the  voluntary work that she did during her time at NP so much that she decided to pursue a degree in it.

This was not the only incident that I witnessed or heard about where passion appeared to trump pecuniary interests. I was recently invited to the Chapman University Singapore‘s graduates’ networking nite, an annual event where graduates of the university’s Bachelor of Fine Arts in Creative Producing get to meet, chat and network with industry professionals in the hopes of getting leads and contacts in securing a job.

I was pleasantly surprised when I met several of my former students who went on to Chapman after completing NP’s mass communication diploma. Two of them – Justin Deimen and Shawn Tan especially impressed me. Justin is going on a MDA sponsored attachment with a LA-based company, Film Financing Inc, in the heart of Hollywood.

Shawn has already written a script for his first feature film, a Singaporean narrative that I’m sure will strike a cord with many locals. Shawn is so passionate about his film that he has attracted the attention of Singapore’s hit film-maker Jack Neo, who has now employed him as a producer.

So are these just isolated examples? Are the 3 persons mentioned above foolish to pursue their passion? Will time dampen their passion and piling pecuniary needs slowly start chipping away at the single-minded resolve that these brave individuals displayed early on in their careers? Should you pursue your passion even if it is not going to make you a lot of money?

My opinion on this perennial dilemna that graduates face is that you should always try and meet your base needs first (Maslow’s hierarchy of needs) for eg. food, water and shelter.

Once your base needs are met and you have cleared your debts (paid off your university tuition fee loans), you are comfortable enough to take some risks with your career.

So this would mean that you may have to take a job early on in your career that you may not really like but it helps to pay the bills.

But I believe that if you are really passionate about something, it gets into your sub-conscious mind such that it will somehow move you towards doing it. It may not happen all at once or in one big, swift action but perhaps in small, baby steps.

For the initiated, what may happen is that you may actually plan how you take those baby steps and experience the small baby wins along the way which will finally allow you to take the plunge to pursue your passion full time.

So if following your passion makes you a happier person, why not do it even if does not make you more money?

Well, CEO of Radish Systems, Theresa Szczurek, has a slightly different take on this. She believes that happiness leads to riches and not the other way round. So you should follow your passion because it makes you a happier person, which will then bring you more money.

Passion brings with it 2 things: the need to contribute and the need to connect. People want to be able to make a meaningful impact on what the company is trying to achieve. Secondly, in contributing, people want to be connected to the “best parts of themselves and to a community”

In fact Daniel Gulati of the Harvard Business Review says that now more than ever, young professionals need to take positive action in pursuing their passion in their careers rather than succumbing to the draw of the mullah. He thinks that more and more professionals are unhappy with their high paying jobs because it is not what they enjoy doing.

Gulati suggests 3 ways for professionals to start making the career switch to follow their passion.

a) De-emphasise prestige and compensation

b) Start experimenting with doing different work

c) Spend time defining your passions

Passion can indeed take you far if you are willing take the risks inspite of not having fulfilled even your basic needs.

Take the example of Eric Simons, a 19 year old entrepreneur who sneaked into the office of AOL in Silicon Valley and went about his “business” in the premises undetected for about 2 months. He lived in the office, slept on the sofas in the office, ate for free in the cafetaria and showered in the gym. And all the time, he worked on his start-up, an idea which allowed teachers to share lesson plans.

Being a Chicago native, he had no relatives in Silicon Valley and noone to turn to for help (monetary or otherwise). AOL employees recognised him but thought that he was an AOL staff. They also said that he was the most hard-working person in AOL as he was the first person in and the last person “to leave”. But the irony was that they did not know that he never left the office.

Eric was finally caught by the security but AOL did not report him to the police. On the contrary, AOL rewarded him for his tenacity by offering him US$50,000 in funding for his start-up. He is now aiming to raise another US$500,000.

Eric Simons’ example is perhaps an extreme one where he was willing to risk being imprisoned for his efforts in pursuing his passion.

But my parting advice to graduates on this passion vs pecuniary issue is this.

Not all of us are able to be like Eric Simons. But life is a journey. Your career forms the major expedition within this journey. And within this journey, you will have to berth your ship at various ports to re-fuel and re-charge. These ports are sojourns which precede your final destination. Just ensure that your passion guides you on the path towards this destination.