Tag / #Singapore

Remembering Mr S R Nathan, an honourable son of Singapore

By Lim Siong Guan

Today, all of us in Singapore bid a final farewell to Mr S R Nathan, who was the President of Singapore from 1999 to 2011.

I had sent the following message to Mrs S R Nathan the day after Mr Nathan passed on:

“Dear Mrs Nathan, I am praying for you as I ponder the blessings that have come to me through Mr Nathan. He was ever considerate, ever thoughtful, ever gracious, and ever the wonderful human being who loved Singapore, and served his country with absolute loyalty and much personal sacrifice which you and your family shared. now that my wife and I admire you and Mr Nathan very much for the humanity of your manners and your generosity of spirit.”

Mr Nathan had always been willing to share the wisdom of his knowledge and experience, yet always spoke in humble tones. He agreed to write a blurb for the second book I had written with Joanne H Lim entitled “WINNING WITH HONOUR in Relationships, Family, Organisations, Leadership and Life”, which you can read here.

After we sent him a hardcover copy of the published book, he wrote a personal note to me on 12 June 2016 in his usual, neat, cursive written hand, as follows:

“My dear Siong Guan,

Thank you for sending me your Book “Winning with Honour”. I had a quick browse through it and admired the numerous quotations about Honour throughout the Book. That itself must have been a long & tedious exercise that brings out the wisdom in them. But so many, is really unbelievable by itself.

With age my attention span is no longer the same. After the stroke I sometimes get tired and stop reading. The past is still very clear but yesterday is often forgotten. So seeing the Cross Roads is indeed enlightening to me.

Please thank Joanne for a wonderful 2^nd Book – will she do one for children. Epigram Books do well in Cartoons. Edmund, previously of the ST owns it.

With warm regards

Sincerely

Nathan”

Winning with Honour l Letter from Mr S R Nathan

As we mentioned on page 425 of “Winning with Honour”, David Brooks, writer and commentator in the New York Times, began his book “The Road to Character” (Random House 2015), with the words:

“Recently I’ve been thinking about the difference between the résumé virtues and the eulogy virtues. The résumé virtues are the ones you list on your résumé, the skills that you bring to the job market and that contribute to external success. The eulogy virtues are deeper. They’re the virtues that get talked about at your funeral, the ones that exist at the core of your being – whether you are kind, brave, honest or faithful; what kind of relationships you formed.

Most of us would say that the eulogy virtues are more important than the résumé virtues, but I confess that for long stretches of my life I’ve spent more time thinking about the latter than the former. Our education system is certainly oriented around the résumé virtues more than the eulogy ones. Public conversation is, too – the self-help tips in magazines, the nonfiction bestsellers. Most of us have clearer strategies about how to achieve career success than we do about how to develop a profound character.”

Mr Nathan certainly lived his life based upon eulogy virtues, as reflected in the numerous heartfelt tributes penned by many Singaporeans following Mr Nathan’s passing. Here are a few examples of these tributes that were published in The Straits Times on 25 August 2016.

[FIRST - 8] ST/PRIME/PAGE ... 25/08/16

Former US President, Mr John F Kennedy, in his “City Upon a Hill” speech when he addressed the Joint Convention of the General Court of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts in Boston on 9 January 1961, two weeks before he was sworn in as President of the United States, had said:

“When at some future date the high court of history sits in judgment on each one of us … our success or failure, in whatever office we may hold, will be measured by the answers to four questions:

First, were we truly men of courage – with the courage to stand up to one’s enemies – and the courage to stand up, when necessary, to one’s associates – the courage to resist public pressure, as well as private greed?

Secondly, were we truly men of judgment – with perceptive judgment of the future as well as the past – of our own mistakes as well as the mistakes of others – with enough wisdom to know that we did not know, and enough candour to admit it?

Third, were we truly men of integrity – men who never ran out on either the principles in which they believed or the people who believed in them – men who believed in us – men whom neither financial gain nor political ambition could ever divert from the fulfilment of our sacred trust?

Finally, were we truly men of dedication – with an honour mortgaged to no single individual or group, and compromised by no private obligation or aim, but devoted solely to serving the public good and the national interest.”

For Mr Nathan, the answer is clearly a resounding YES to all four questions.

Winning with Honour l Mr John F Kennedy l 1981 January 9

Thank you for winning with Honour in life and for all that you have done for Singapore, Mr Nathan. May your spirit of Honour and duty live on in the hearts of all Singaporeans.

26th August 2016 by Joanne

OF RECOGNITION AND RETRIBUTION

Of the many recipients of National Day Awards this year, I knew 40 of them personally, so I sent congratulatory emails to them all.

Interestingly, not a single one of them responded by simply thanking me for my good wishes – every one of them commended their colleagues as having been the real reason for their successful contributions towards the well-being of Singapore. Some said they consider themselves to be receiving the award on behalf of their colleagues.

To me, this is truly remarkable, and a testimony to the oneness most Singaporeans feel not simply as a nation, but also at their workplaces.

Leadership is making good things happen, which on their own would not happen. Leaders make good things happen. It is not chance, but a matter of grasping opportunity and creating opportunity to do good.

And oftentimes doing good is by helping others come up and become the best that they can be. I am reminded of the words of Laozi, an ancient Chinese philosopher.

Earlier this week, Mr Lui Tuck Yew, Minister for Transport, announced that he would not be standing in the coming general elections, despite the Prime Minister’s expression of full confidence in him and intention to appoint him to the Cabinet if he were to be re-elected.

One can only guess why Mr Lui has decided to quit politics. The transport portfolio has, no doubt, been highly demanding, given public expectation of smooth and fast rides with no breakdowns. And, equally without doubt, Mr Lui has poured heart and soul into his responsibilities.

The social media has been chattering with people giving their reactions to Mr Lui’s departure.

Among them are comments which suggest that Mr Lui was in fact removed because of inadequacies in Singapore’s transportation operations, rather than that he had decided on his own to let another take on the task. The tone of the comments even suggest a measure of delight at this happening. It demonstrates a “blame and retribution” culture that tends to diminish performance rather than enhance performance.

Think about it: through all the breakdowns, Mr Lui would have learnt an enormous lot about what can and should be done about the transportation system, and for us to think that the smartest thing the government should do is to remove him cannot make sense – the result is that someone else will come on who will have to learn all the large and small things about the transportation system all over again.

Speaking of the “blame and retribution culture” with respect to Mr Lui is only by way of illustration. It often takes place in companies and organisations. It cannot be smart for leaders to act in this way.

By all means remove the incompetent and irresponsible, but as long as people have the willingness and capacity to change and to learn, removing the person for mistakes will only undermine risk-taking, creativity and innovation, which are the very essence of new idea creation and continuous improvement.

An open mind and an open heart make for creativity, innovation, progress, and productivity!

15th August 2015 by Joanne

How new leaders can sustain Singapore’s success

GIC group president and former civil service head Lim Siong Guan spoke on honour, wealth, leadership and Mr Lee Kuan Yew’s legacy at a Business Times conference last Tuesday. Here are edited excerpts of his speech that were published in The Straits Times on 6 April 2015.

OFTEN when visitors come to Singapore, they are briefed on the Housing Board, the Central Provident Fund, the Urban Redevelopment Authority, the education system, the health system and so on.

While these are critical factors, I believe there is a deeper cultural reason to explain Singapore’s success since independence.

The explanation lies in an ability to trust Singapore, where promises are kept, the rule of law is maintained, justice is assured, intellectual property rights are protected, meritocracy is practised and government policies are consistent and predictable.

Singapore offers integrity, incorruptibility, reliability, quality and trustworthiness, keeping promises even though it may involve lots of hard work and overcoming unexpected difficulties.

“Trust” and “trustworthy” are the key words.

Trust is the lifeblood that determines the quality of relationships that undergird every community and society.

And honour is the foundation of trust, where the people, businesses and government deliver on their word of honour.

Singapore’s success in the last 50 years is the result of human imagination and hard work, as well as the courage to be different and unique, founded on honour, integrity and trust that the people of Singapore will do what is good and right for themselves, their families and their society.

It is a matter of “enlightened self-interest”, where honour makes good sense for life, living and livelihood.

This still has to be the blueprint for the continued success and survival of Singapore.

As we look into the future, we can also expect an increasing desire by citizens to speak out on a widening array of national issues, and to be able to act on their own initiatives but with government support or, at least, tolerance if not approbation.

In order to maintain peace, harmony and stability even in such times of debate, there must be a national consensus that all things are done with a view to enhance the well-being of the nation for the generations to come.

To achieve this, there must be a strong vein of honour and mutual respect between individuals even when there may be sharp differences in views.

Attitudes towards wealth

IN THE early years, Singapore was poor, and the life attitude of both the people and the Government was that of a “poor man” – life is uncertain, earn what you can, save what you can, spend on what you need, we never know what tomorrow will bring, so be prepared and save for the rainy day.

So Singapore was at Point A of the Grid – country is poor, and life attitude of the people is that of a poor man.

With the passage of time, Singapore became rich. But many people still perceive the Government as having the attitude of the “poor man”.

So the people reckon Singapore is at Point B of the Grid, though some people have said that, in fairness, the Government is not at Point B but at some point between B and C.

However, what the people are wondering is, if we are really rich, shouldn’t we be at Point C of the Grid – country is rich and the Government provides for the people – for a life attitude of that of a rich man?

And that, to my mind, is the fundamental reason for much of the angst between the people and the Government: The people reckon we should be at Point C, while the Government is perceived as sticking to Point B.

The Government, understandably, has the particular concern that if Singapore is at Point C, it could be setting itself up to fall into Point D of the Grid, where the country is in fact poor, but the Government provides for the people as though they are rich.

The interesting question is: Are there countries at Point D of the Grid?

Many observers reckon there are indeed many countries at Point D, starting with Greece as the obvious case, and then the United States, Europe and Japan, where people have been used to having their governments adopt policies and provide benefits like a “rich man”, but in fact these governments no longer have the revenues to support such policies, so they borrow to be able to continue to extend the benefits to the people and have huge sums of unfunded liabilities.

The “poverty” of these governments is often “invisible” because of their “pay-as-you-go” pension schemes, social security schemes and medical support schemes, where the pension and benefits for the retirees are paid for by collections from the working population, a formula under threat as the working populations dwindle with low birth rates and immigration, while the retiree populations balloon with increased life expectancies arising from advances in medicine and healthcare.

The interesting question is: Can Singapore recover from Point D, should it fall from Point C to Point D?

Because if Singapore can recover from Point D to Point C, rather than inexorably go from Point D to Point A, perhaps the risk of getting to Point C may be worth taking. Singapore had made it from Point A to Point B by astute national leadership.

It was leadership making good use of opportunities arising from a confluence of geostrategic factors, whether it was the withdrawal of British military forces east of Suez or the Vietnam War or the Plaza Accord.

The situation is different today, so that the chances of recovering from Point D to go back to Point C rather than Point A are far from assured.

Why risk it?

Perhaps the Government thinks the chances of avoiding Point D are best assured by staying at Point B.

The real discussion that is necessary, in my mind, should be to first recognise the disconnect in a public perception of the Government being at Point B while the public desire is to be at Point C, and to have a good national debate on how to keep staying at Point C if Singapore moves there.

This national debate has to be centred on two questions: What economic policies does Singapore need to keep the wealth level up?

What social policies does Singapore need to keep spending and expectations within sustainable limits?

Young must seek to lead

WE FACE what has been referred to as a VUCA world – a future that is Volatile, Uncertain, Complex and Ambiguous.

It will be impossible to deal with complexity in a reactive mode. Big data is the catchword today, and certainly a lot more benefit and opportunity are waiting to be discovered and mined.

And to the fear that computers will take over the world one day, as computers become smarter and smarter, has come the riposte: Humans must become smarter than the computer, and they can be if they work at it.

While computers may crunch the numbers faster, humans must imagine better.

The way to deal with complexity and ambiguity is for leaders to offer a clear vision, and then figure out how the vision intersects with what parts of the complex world.

We cannot afford to have leaders who lead by crisis, whose approach is reactiveness and whose agenda is simply to do what the people want them to do.

Leaders must be anticipative and able to communicate a worthy future.

They are leaders whose values are clear, whose idea of “good” carries the support of the people, whose principles for thought and action are exemplary, who are not arrogant but confident, who are consistent yet flexible, who are steadfast yet adaptable, whose intent is always to be in time for the future while moving country and company to be the best it can be, and whose heart always cares for the people.

As every generation needs its own leaders who understand their generation better and can more instinctively connect with them, the young in Singapore must not eschew leadership but seek it.

Dealing with the Vuca world requires young people who have self-confidence, courage, integrity, wisdom, judgment, energy and imagination.

In any competition, whether it be between countries or companies, energy and imagination always wins.

We must keep developing the next generation of leaders, who have to be competent, committed and confident.

Singapore needs leaders with vigour, spirit and courage. Because leadership is about making things happen, success is never guaranteed and the path is often uncertain.

Stand on the shoulders of giants by learning from our forefathers who have built Singapore into what it is today, but we must seek to exceed them, to chart our own path because our circumstances are different from theirs.

It is not what they did per se that is important, but the spirit and attitude in which they conducted themselves that merit learning.

Their qualities of boldness, uniqueness, pursuit of excellence, unwavering determination, readiness to learn from mistakes and reliability should serve as our compass of values and principles as we sail forth into uncharted waters.

The Lee Kuan Yew spirit

WE MUST not miss the legacy of Mr Lee Kuan Yew. It is not the bustling metropolis that is Singapore, nor is it Singapore’s entry into the class of First World economy from Third World.

Mr Lee’s legacy is the spirit of courage and imagination, integrity above all else, delivering on promises and being a people of our word.

6th April 2015 by Joanne

Mr Lee Kuan Yew passed on young…will you too?

As Singaporeans continue to ponder the legacy of Mr Lee Kuan Yew, it would do us well to recognise that Singapore is a product of imagination and human endeavour, a mix of ideals, vigour, fortitude and courage, the attributes that make for superior leadership.

A highly inspiring poem in this regard is “Youth” by Samuel Ullman. It is a poem which highly inspired Konosuke Matsushita, founder of Panasonic, the largest Japanese consumer electronics company.

“YOUTH”

by Samuel Ullman

Youth is not a time of life;

it is a state of mind;

it is not a matter of rosy cheeks, red lips and supple knees;

it is a matter of the will, a quality of the imagination, a vigour of the emotions;

it is the freshness of the deep springs of life.

Youth means a temperamental predominance of courage over timidity,

of the appetite for adventure over the love of ease.

This often exists in a man of sixty more than a boy of twenty.

Nobody grows old merely by a number of years.

We grow old by deserting our ideals.

Years may wrinkle the skin, but to give up enthusiasm wrinkles the soul.

Worry, fear, self-distrust bows the heart and turns the spirit back to dust.

Whether sixty or sixteen, there is in every human being’s heart

the lure of wonder,

the unfailing child-like appetite of what’s next, and

the joy of the game of living.

In the center of your heart and my heart there is a wireless station;

so long as it receives messages of beauty, hope, cheer, courage and power

from men and from the infinite,

so long are you young.

When the aerials are down, and your spirit is covered with snows of cynicism and the ice of pessimism,

then you are grown old, even at twenty,

but as long as your aerials are up, to catch the waves of optimism,

there is hope you may die young at eighty.

We honour Mr Lee Kuan Yew, who was a leader and a fighter with a relentless drive to improve the well-being of his nation, and who continued to learn well into his old age.

With his courageous and adventurous spirit, Mr Lee Kuan Yew passed on young at ninety-one.

Will we be young when we pass on? It is a worthy choice we all can make.

29th March 2015 by Joanne

Honouring a Great Leader, Mr Lee Kuan Yew (1923 – 2015)

Today, we honour our founding Prime Minister, Mr Lee Kuan Yew, who passed away early this morning. Mr Lee Kuan Yew was, without a doubt, a great leader, a real blessing and inspiration to all Singaporeans.

If we look at an atlas of the world, Singapore, the country, fits quite nicely into the letter “o” in its name. Indeed, in most atlases, they have to make a point of enlarging the dot so that Singapore may be pointed out. That is how small Singapore is.

When Singapore became, rather unexpectedly, independent in August 1965, it had to find its own way into the future: the dream of a common market in Malaysia was broken, and Indonesia was still conducting konfrantasi (military confrontation against) Singapore.

Singapore had to reach out beyond its immediate surroundings and “leap frog” the region to adopt the whole world as its hinterland, its source of capital, investment, research and technology, management capability, and, most of all, markets.

Singapore is the result of human imagination and human endeavour.

Singapore has attained First World status economically, and has become a guide and a hope for many nations.

Mr Lee Kuan Yew personified leadership that was visionary and courageous, which set Singapore on the good and right path to all we have been able to accomplish in the first 50 years of independence. Plans for economic and social development were carefully conceived and well executed.

But there is a deeper cultural reason to explain Singapore’s success since independence.

The explanation lies in an ability to trust Singapore to be honourable and be a place where promises are kept, the rule of law is maintained, justice is assured, intellectual property rights are protected, meritocracy is practised, and government policies are consistent.

Singapore offers integrity, incorruptibility, reliability, quality, and trustworthiness, keeping promises even though it may involve lots of hard work and overcoming unexpected difficulties.

“Trust” and “trustworthy” are the key words. Trust is the lifeblood that determines the quality of relationships that undergird every community and society. And honour is the foundation of trust, where the people, business and government deliver on their word of honour.

Honour has been the foundation of Singapore’s trustworthiness. It is a fundamental virtue in the compass for the country’s success in the years to come. It is a virtue which has to be renewed with every generation of Singaporeans as well as be a constant reminder to all Singaporeans.

Honour is the essential quality that distinguishes Singapore from many nations in the world. It is the special brand of Singapore.

Mr Lee, we owe so much to you on the way to think, the attitude to life, and the resourcefulness and determination to get things done. This is our expression of gratitude and praise, that you left us a legacy that is for us either to enjoy and build upon, or to take for granted and waste.

Lesser leaders count the value of their leadership on the basis of the organisation breaking down after they leave.

Great leaders count the value of their leadership on the basis of the organisation they leave behind being able to go on to greater heights with strength and vigour.

Mr Lee Kuan Yew was, without a doubt, a great leader.

Photo Credit: http://www.lee-kuan-yew.com/leekuanyew-memoirs.jpg

23rd March 2015 by Joanne

The Penguin, The Wild Goose, and The Eagle

It is not unusual for parents to go out of their way to sacrifice for their children’s education.

There are many children from South Korea, for example, studying in Singapore because Singapore offers a safe and secure environment, an Asian cultural mix, a good place to learn both English and Chinese – languages much prized in Korea as parents think about the future for their children.

Often the mothers are with their children in Singapore, while the fathers stay back to work and pay for the cost of their children’s studies in Singapore.

This is sacrifice, forgoing other things to pay for their children’s education; but I have learned that the sacrifice is very much also an emotional one.

South Koreans reflect this, in jest, by saying there are three kinds of fathers who sacrifice for their children’s education:

The Penguin
The Goose
The Eagle

The Penguin: The “penguin” is the father who cannot afford to “fly”. The “penguin” works hard but cannot afford to pay for family reunions.

The Wild Goose: The “wild goose” flies at set seasons to reunite with his family, just like the literal wild geese migrate southward for winter and northward as summer approaches.

The Eagle: The “eagle” is the father who is free to fly at any time because he has the money to afford to do so.

I commend all these fathers and mothers who sacrifice in order to seek to secure their children’s future the best way they know how.

31st October 2014 by Joanne

SUPERMAN, YODA, CHANGE CRUSADER

Published in the STRAITS TIMES on 31 Aug 2014

BY SUSAN LONG, SENIOR WRITER

He may be the group president of Singapore sovereign wealth fund GIC, but Mr Lim Siong Guan rides the MRT to work. He alights at Raffles Place, then walks about 20 minutes to GIC’s office in Robinson Road for the exercise.

If he needs a postage stamp or has any errand of a personal nature, he queues for it himself instead of bothering his secretary.

His yearly tour of GIC overseas offices since 2007 – four days around the world: Singapore, San Francisco, New York, London, Singapore; and another four days around Asia: Singapore, Mumbai, Tokyo, Seoul, Beijing, Shanghai, Singapore – is the stuff of corporate legend.

He does not book a single hotel room, sleeps on the plane, refuses a corporate limousine and insists on public transport. He lives out of a small carry-on bag and showers in GIC office gyms. The London office keeps a spare towel for him.

It is a practice the former chairman of the Economic Development Board says he picked up from his EDB days of city-hopping as “check-in luggage increases very significantly the chances of missing connecting flights”.

By all accounts, Mr Lim is an iconoclast. The former head of the Singapore civil service, who served as permanent secretary in the ministries of Defence, Education and Finance, and in the Prime Minister’s Office, is also a hard act to follow.

He sticks out in the financial sector because of his ascetic values, thrift and humility. He owns a Volvo S60, easily the smallest car among his colleagues.

While he won’t spend on hotel rooms, he’s prepared to spend a lot to effect organisational change. Everywhere he goes, he ignites a mini revolution, cutting red tape, operating close to the boundaries and bucking conventions.

Dr Teh Kok Peng, chairman of business space solutions provider Ascendas and formerly president of GIC Special Investments, says: “In the office, some call him ‘Superman’ for his drive, energy and nobility of intention. He demands a lot of himself so he’s in a position to demand a lot from others too.”

His pet phrase is: “Are we ready for the future?” His pet name is Yoda, for his wisdom, long-range thinking and fearlessness in challenging his staff to think, even ahead of their ministers.

He is also known as one of the toughest – because of his formidable intellect and unbending principle – yet nicest bosses to work for in the civil service. His top question to staff is always: “How can I help you do your job better?”

Stories abound of the small and big ways in which he intervened to help others. None of this, of course, will ever be disclosed by the wiry, reticent 67-year-old.

He minimises it all, ascribing it to his yearning for “simplicity” and to “experience what ordinary people have to experience”.

Next stop: Honour

Mr Lim might be onto his biggest change platform yet – trying to engineer social and behavioural change in Singapore by promoting a culture of honour. And the futurist has his work cut out for him.

Earlier this month, he founded and launched non-profit organisation Honour (Singapore), which was attacked online for its vagueness and suspected Christian agenda.

It’s easy to to see why as his diffidence makes him a tough interviewee.

He will not lament the deficiency of honour today, beyond saying it is latent in everyone, just not brought to the level of consciousness yet.

He is modest to a fault, not given to laying out bold plans or mission statements. He refuses, too, to make a big deal of honour – imbuing it with an everyday ubiquitous quality. He insists it’s not abstract but part of ordinary living here, such as people offering their seat on the MRT or a taxi driver arriving on time, as promised.

The only thing he is categorical about is that Honour (Singapore) has no right-wing Christian agenda. It has been taken to task online for not declaring that all five members of its board are part of Full Gospel Business (FGB) Singapore, an inter-denominational group of Christian professionals. Additionally, Honour (Singapore)’s executive director and board member Jason Wong is also chairman of Focus on the Family Singapore, a pro-family Christian charity.

For the record, Mr Lim states that Honour has no view on LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender) issues. Neither is it an advocacy group for government policy, which it will not comment on.

After 37 years in the civil service, he says he understands the “extreme sensitivity” of race and religion. “Our intentions are very narrowly promoting a culture of honour and honouring. Clearly, Honour is not a Christian organisation. It can’t be if you’re trying to do something which has national value,” he says.

He adds that it would be impossible to advocate Christian work when it has a panel of 10 community advisers of differing religions, including Muslims and Buddhists, such as Haji Mohammad Alami Musa, president of the Islamic Religious Council of Singapore or Muis; Mr Chua Thian Poh, chairman of Ho Bee Land; and Ms Claire Chiang, senior vice-president of Banyan Tree Holdings.

But what about the worry expressed by netizens that his board’s overwhelming religious affiliation will lead to the imposition of Christian values of honour?

He says teachings like doing unto others as you would have them do unto you, honouring your parents and loving your neighbours are common to many religions. He cites humanitarian organisations started as an expression of faith such as Mercy Relief, started by Muslim group Perdaus in 2001, and St Andrew’s Mission Hospital, set up by the Anglican Church in 1913, which are now multiracial, multi-religious and secular in nature.

What about talk that Honour was set up at the behest of the Prime Minister to be a counter to the liberal tide out there and exemplify a more respectful response to the shrill voices out there?

Mr Lim seems affronted at this suggestion and says: “Absolutely not, he never spoke to me about it.”

As for the seeming haste to set up Honour, which led to it being registered under the same address as FGB, as well as to save costs, he says it is because the 50th year of Singapore’s Independence started on the 10th of August this year. “We thought that we ought to try to make it before the start of the 50th year,” he says, with his characteristic sense of urgency.

Use it or lose it

Honour (Singapore) is his practical-minded reaction to the treacly nostalgia of the SG50 celebrations, to mark Singapore’s 50th year of Independence next year.

Reading about the publicity on SG50, he felt it was overwhelmingly about celebration, honouring the pioneer generation and the past, which was good.

But he says: “The value of the past is to extract that which is critical that has brought us success, and to make sure that we don’t lose it as we think about the future.

“Every time people visit Singapore, we show them our Housing Board flats, CPF, education system, we talk about our strong leadership and political will – all of which are important. But if I were to ask myself, so what is the brand image of Singapore? What made us succeed? What is the defining characteristic of Singapore?

“It is trustworthiness. That’s why corporations plonk billions here and are prepared to wait 10 or 20 years to recover their investments. That’s why so many Singaporeans work in China as financial controllers and accountants, jobs which require total integrity and honesty.”

At the same time, he saw the fractious way public debates were being conducted here. So about four months ago, he rounded up a few friends to set up Honour (Singapore) to focus on the practice of honour – honouring our word and each other.

He believes this will help Singapore continue to succeed and stand out among nations. “Otherwise countries, like organisations, after a period of success, may end up with generations who are not aware or conscious about what has brought about that success,” he warns, adding that none of those invited to sit on his board or panel refused.

“If you look at the atlas of the world, Singapore fits within the letter ‘O’ of the name of the country. The reality is no one owes us a living. You matter if you succeed, you don’t matter if you fail.”

The closest thing he’s done to promote honour is introducing the concept of Total Defence in 1984, during his stint as permanent secretary at the Ministry of Defence.

That exercise was about getting people to think of defence beyond the hardware of military, civil and economic defence, to the softer factors of social defence and psychological defence, which “is about how people relate to each other and how people think about their home”.

“It’s very difficult to do something to bring about a new conviction in people. What you’re trying to do is take something already there and make it a conscious part of you,” he describes.

The difference today, he concedes, is that in his previous change-making roles, he was just doing his job. This is the first one he has given himself.

“Maybe it’s a reflection of my old age, a desire to do something while I can, before I fade from the scene,” lets on the author of the recent bestseller, The Leader, The Teacher & You. “I’ve got grandchildren, so I’m thinking about what kind of future I am leaving for them.”

He is also up against the fact that no such value-based organisation like Honour exists in the world as yet, hence all the speculations.

But he bids you judge it by what Honour (Singapore) will do. Right now, it runs a website with a weekly blog to inspire honouring behaviour. Soon, it will do talks on “leading, learning, loving and living with honour” and take part in conferences – by invitation only – in schools, businesses and community groups.

Mr Lim, who says he is on a year-to-year renewable contract with GIC and intends to stay only as long as he is “useful”, will kick off these talks himself. He will take leave from GIC to do so, just as he has conscientiously taken leave to do this three-hour interview with The Sunday Times.

Achieving transcendence

He was the eldest son of a taxi driver and teacher who got only two new sets of clothes a year – during Chinese New Year and at Christmas. Home was a rent-controlled compound house in Upper Serangoon shared with 20 other relatives.

His biggest thrill was when his father swung by in his taxi to pick him up from Paya Lebar Methodist Afternoon School. The bright boy, who transferred to Anglo-Chinese School at Primary 5, worked hard to attain the highest rank of Colour Sergeant with the Boys’ Brigade, struggling only with Chinese.

Whenever he or his three younger siblings failed in any endeavour, after putting in their best effort, his parents would take them out for a picnic. The value he caught was that: “The team that loses is the one that needs to be taken to McDonald’s, not the winners. They need to be encouraged to go down to the football pitch next week to fight again.”

He also learnt to treat everyone – regardless of station – with kindness. His mother had such a rapport with their Malay washerwoman, who lived in a nearby Malay kampung, that when the racial tensions broke out in the 1960s, she became their “guardian”.

A university education was beyond his family’s means. But he won the President’s Scholarship to study at the University of Adelaide and graduated with first class honours in mechanical engineering in 1969, which gave him his clear-eyed, problem-solving approach to life.

He started work here as a mechanical engineer at sewage treatment plants where he got his hands dirty. From 1978 to 1981, he was the first principal private secretary to then Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew who, along with the late former deputy prime minister Goh Keng Swee, he considers his “master teachers”.

He then became permanent secretary at the Ministry of Defence from 1981 to 1994, where he raised the morale of the Singapore Armed Forces with a public campaign that positioned soldiers as defenders of the nation. From 1994 to 1998, as permanent secretary at the Prime Minister’s Office, then head of the civil service from 1999 to 2005, he championed the PS21 reformation, leading the public service to become more performance-driven, customer-focused, responsive to change and among the most admired in the world.

At the Ministry of Education (1997 to 1999), he was the architect of the “Thinking schools, learning nation” initiative. He introduced national education in schools and the President’s Award for Teachers to restore the honour traditionally accorded to them.

At the Ministry of Finance (1999 to 2006), he is credited for transforming the Government’s financial management system, promoting e-government and leading the ministry to reduce income tax rates and nhance Singapore’s tax competitiveness. He even introduced an award, called the ERRward, to recognise failure, a reflection of his belief that innovation involves experimentation and failures.

Upon his retirement in 2006, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong paid tribute to his “unbroken record of understanding Singapore’s challenges and developing a vision of how the public service should respond to these challenges”.

From 2006 to 2009, he went on to chair the EDB, then preside over GIC from 2007, where he continued his bruising momentum of change and organisational overhaul to help them meet the future. Dr Beh Swan Gin, Permanent Secretary at the Ministry of Law, remembers: “When he first came to EDB, officers asked him about his vision for EDB, and his reply was that he had no vision aside from making possible the collective vision of EDB officers. That answer was very empowering.”

Most of all, his staff – past and present – remember how he treats people, how he bothers to reply and thank by name the clerks who send out mass e-mail reports to the whole organisation.

They also hail him as an unstinting mentor with an openness of spirit to engage anyone – no matter how junior – and a consummate teacher whose homilies are peppered with children’s stories, song lyrics and poems.

Indeed, the change that Mr Lim is proudest of is what he has wrought in other peoples’ lives. The otherwise unforthcoming father of three grown children – a paediatric anaesthetist, civil servant and branding consultant – and grandfather of five pipes up: “I know what makes me feel happy – when people tell me that I helped them realise their potential in some way. To me, leadership is about transcendence, it is about what do you do for other people.”

This could be why his past and present staff remain fiercely loyal.

Mr Yeoh Keat Chuan, managing director of EDB, counts him as one of the “most selfless” leaders he has ever known. “He is always willing to give up his personal time to help others even though I know he would dearly like to spend more time with his grandchildren.”

Accountant-General Chua Geok Wah, who witnessed the transformation of the civil service under Mr Lim, sums up her tribute to him by quoting ancient Chinese philosopher Lao Tzu.

“A leader is best when people barely know he exists, when his work is done, his aim fulfilled, they will say, ‘we did it ourselves’.”

BACKGROUND STORY

Why call it Honour?

“I was asked why don’t we call it Trust or Respect, which are easier to understand and have less ambiguity. But it would have lost a very important point about ‘honour’. Honour is something we offer unconditionally on our own initiative, whereas trust or respect is our reaction to someone who behaves in a way that makes us believe in him or her.”

His motivation

“All my motivation for change has really been about the future. If you don’t change, are you good enough for the future? That’s the real driver. SG50 is about the past, we have to think about the future. What does the future need? Two things. One is, we need to continue to be a people whose word is our honour. Second, we also need to develop as a people who know how to live with a diversity of views and from all that diversity come to good conclusions as to how we move our way forward.”

suelong@sph.com.sg

11th September 2014 by Joanne

WHAT THE HELL IS WATER?

The late author David Foster Wallace began his commencement address to the graduates of Kenyon College in 2005 with:

There are these two young fish swimming along and they happen to meet an older fish swimming the other way, who nods at them and says “Morning, boys. How’s the water?” And the two young fish swim on for a bit, and then eventually one of them looks over at the other and goes, “What the hell is water?”

As Wallace explained, the point of the fish story is merely that the most obvious, important realities are often the ones that are hardest to see and talk about.

We celebrated our 49th National Day last Saturday 9 August 2014. It also means we are now into our 50th year of independent statehood, our year of Jubilee. I will discuss the significance of Jubilee in some future blog. But in this blog I would simply like to draw our minds to what is the important reality about Singapore that is possibly, or even probably, hard “to see and talk about”.

What is the reason for Singapore’s economic success all these years, when Singapore had to strike its own path of success and survival after giving up the idea of needing to have an economic hinterland next door, which was the reason for Singapore’s desire to merge with the Malayan peninsula to its north and thus had been part of Malaysia?

In terms of strategies and schemes, Singapore had decided to “leapfrog the region” and reach out to the whole world as its “hinterland”, the source of investment capital, management capability, technology, and, most of all, markets. There was massive investment in education and training, a major thrust in home ownership through the work of the Housing and Development Board and the Central Provident Fund scheme to create stakes for everyone, and a global push for investments through the Economic Development Board. But this focus on schemes and policies, exactly, could cause us to miss the critical point.

Why should companies invest billions of dollars in Singapore knowing they would need tens of years to recover their investments? They have done so because they have found the people and government of Singapore to be trustworthy. We could be relied on to work hard and to deliver on our promises, even if we faced unexpected difficulties and many obstacles along the way. Singapore’s perspective was that of long-term business and personal relationships, the type of relationship which could only survive where trust and credibility are never in question.

Singapore is an artificial construct: We are the result of human effort and invention. We have a reputation for honouring our word as manifested in integrity, incorruptibility, hard work, imagination in solving problems, and future-orientedness. It is easy to forget that Singapore is the product of human ingenuity and trustworthiness, which can be easily lost if not understood and sustained by Singaporeans.

A Harvard University professor visiting Singapore for the first time remarked he found honour even in the simplest behaviours among Singaporeans, as he saw in the taxi driver who arrived to pick him up exactly at the time promised. To him this was a demonstration of the taxi driver honouring his word.

Singaporeans run the danger of saying, as the fish at the beginning of this story, “What the hell is water?” without recognizing that “Singapore water” is honour and trustworthiness built up over many years through consistent behaviour, predictable policy, social stability, and national unity.

These attributes have certainly made Singapore unique among the many developing countries of the world…the important question is: Are we able to sustain this uniqueness to not only survive, but thrive?

15th August 2014 by Joanne

What is the Secret to Singapore’s Success?

I spoke at a lunch event of The Economist Corporate Network last Monday. There were about 40 CEOs and other business leaders, mostly expats but a few Singaporeans. The topic I spoke on was “The Secret to Singapore’s Success?”…complete with the question mark! I had agreed to speak as I thought the topic to be both intriguing and timely, given all the excitement building up on commemorating the 50th year of Singapore’s independence.

Often when visitors come to Singapore wondering what has been the secret sauce for Singapore’s success, they get briefed on the HDB, CPF Scheme, the education system the EDB, and so on – all true, and all relevant, but, in my mind, perhaps not a fundamental enough explanation. So I started off my talk by saying:

“If you look at an atlas of the world, Singapore, the country, fits quite nicely into the letter “o” in its name. Unlike most countries in the world whose names fit well into their boundaries in the atlas, Singapore’s name is much longer than its size. And if you look again at the atlas, Malaysia lies to the north and east of Singapore, while Indonesia lies to the west, south and east. When Singapore became, rather unexpectedly, independent in August 1965, it had to find its own way into the future: the dream of a common market in Malaysia was broken, and Indonesia was still conducting konfrantasi (military confrontation) against Singapore.”

When President B J Habibie of Indonesia referred to Singapore as a “little red dot” in 1998, he had meant it as a disparaging remark. Little would he have expected that Singapore would take it up as a badge of honour, a symbol of success despite the odds.

President Habibie had sought later to make amends by saying he had not meant “little red dot” to be disparaging: he was speaking to an Indonesian youth group, and was challenging them to seek the progress and success of Indonesia by noting that Singapore, even though just a little red dot, had been able to make a success of itself.

Singapore had reached out beyond its immediate surroundings to adopt the whole world as its hinterland, its source of capital, investment, research and technology, management capability, and, most of all, markets. Later came its growth as a global financial centre, potentially the global financial centre in Asia.

Markets are critically the reason for welcoming MNCs to Singapore, because the smallness of Singapore and its economy simply means that no company in Singapore can grow merely by serving the Singapore market: the key to growth and success lies in penetrating overseas markets, mostly in the region but also globally. Of course we would wish as many Singapore companies as possible to have such global reach, but MNCs are what multiply the reach many many times over, without shutting out the Singapore companies.

What explains Singapore’s success in drawing investments from all over the world, where companies sink their money into Singapore and are prepared to wait 10, 15 or 20 years to recover their money through successful production and business operations? What explains the many research centres to discover new knowledge and design new products, where the protection of intellectual property is the name of the game? And what explains a willingness on the part of so many foreigners to park their funds and their wealth in Singapore?

The explanation lies in an ability to trust Singapore as a place where promises are kept, the rule of law maintained, justice is assured, government policies are predictable. Singapore offers reliability, integrity, quality, hard work and trustworthiness. These are what make for long-term relationships.

Trust is the root of relationships, and honour is the foundation of trust, where the people, businesses and government deliver on their word of honour.

Singapore’s place in the community of nations obviously depends not just on trust, but on being able to mobilize talent, synergise the efforts of workers, employers and government, and superior leadership. But honour has to be the starting point and the abiding foundation.

13th June 2014 by Joanne

OUR GEOGRAPHY, OUR HISTORY, AND GIC

On my recent quick trip to the United States, I had the opportunity and privilege to meet Singaporeans in San Francisco and speak about Singapore’s Financial Reserves and GIC. I had given much the same talk in the past to Singaporeans in Shanghai, New York, and London. There is no escaping knowing them to be Singaporeans once they begin to speak: It is the expressions and the welcome of home. All the Singaporeans invariably think of home, not just their memories of their childhood but their hopes for Singapore to be a great place – the best place – for Singaporeans. Singapore is a point of honour for them, an idea to defend, a home to protect, and a future to secure.

To understand why financial reserves are so important to Singapore, we need to understand geography and history. Less than 20 years ago, a foreign leader referred to Singapore as the Little Red Dot, a point Singaporeans should not be forgetting. If we look at a map of the world, Singapore fits into the letter “o” in its name, unlike many countries whose names fit nicely into their geographical boundaries on the map. And unlike some other small states, we have no natural resources. We are a little dot among states with large land areas and large populations. While Singaporeans may not like to be reminded of this, it nonetheless holds true that “no one owes us a living” and “no one else is responsible for our security.”

And to understand more deeply the need for large financial reserves, we need to remember history. Not everyone learnt history in school, and many who did stopped learning Singapore history in Secondary Four, if not earlier in Secondary Two. While there is the annual reminder on National Day of Singapore’s independence and sovereignty, what an adventurous and risky course Singapore took to “leapfrog” the immediate neighbourhood to link up to the whole world as our economic hinterland is often unspoken, perhaps little understood or even unknown by many Singaporeans.

The point about history is not to hold us back and hold us to the past – it is to give us context for what we need to do to make Singapore a great place for Singaporeans. We cannot escape our geography, but we can make good use of history to create a worthy future for ourselves and our families. It is a whole tapestry about Konfrantasi, water, sand, granite, and food.

When we know our history, we can be clearer about requiring our children to grow up with the capacity for thought, enterprise, and self-confidence to make a Singapore for their time. In addition, we will understand why business in Singapore needs to have its unique capacity for competing on the world stage founded on values of integrity, quality, reliability, imagination, responsiveness, and an unending drive for excellence.

I explained GIC as the fund manager for Singapore’s financial reserves, with the task of preserving and enhancing the value of the reserves, and of helping to contribute towards the government budget each year. The government is allowed to use up to 50 percent of the Net Investment Returns, calculated on the basis of expected long-term real returns multiplied by the net assets (that is, after deducting the liabilities like the special government securities that have been issued to the Central Provident Fund Board). For the next Financial Year, the government is taking into the expenditure budget a sum of $8.1 billion from the Net Investment Returns, which amounts to two percent of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP).

GIC ranks among the large sovereign wealth funds in the world with well over USD100 billion under the management of GIC. It invests in a whole slew of asset classes – equities, debt, real estate – in both the public and private markets, and in both developed and emerging markets across the world. It is headquartered in Singapore with eight overseas offices in Beijing, London, Mumbai, New York, San Francisco, Seoul, Shanghai, and Tokyo. A ninth office is also about to open in Sao Paolo.

An important question is how much of foreign reserves is enough. Obviously, the greater the needs and the more Singapore buys from the world, the larger the foreign reserves need to be. Thus an appropriate balance needs to be struck between spending on the current generation and keeping resources for future generations. The way this is done at present is the Singapore Constitution allowing the government to use up to 50 percent of the long-term real returns for ongoing expenditure, with the rest retained for continuing investment for the benefit of future generations.

Geography and history dictate the wisdom of Singapore maintaining a significant level of financial reserves in order to assure the peace, security, stability, sovereignty, and independence of Singapore.

For GIC to do its job well, we need a continuing flow of talent to perform the investment functions with skill and competence, and also to support the investment operations with efficiency and effectiveness. To this end, GIC offers about five scholarships each year for undergraduate studies anywhere in the world, and also runs an annual GIC Professionals Programme for up to 20 new who have just graduated from university or who have worked for up to 3 years after graduation.

In addition, GIC offers internships for large numbers of undergraduates each year so that they may get familiar with what GIC is about and can then decide whether they wish to consider a career in GIC.

More information is available on the GIC website: www.gic.com.sg. Enquiries from students and parents on the GIC Undergraduate Scholarships, GIC Professional Programme and GIC internships are always welcome: http://www.gic.com.sg/en/contact-us

19th March 2014 by Joanne