A Reprise of “Singapore’s Resilient Strategy”

August 28, 2006 by Bernard Leong  
Filed under Special Commentary

Through Singapore Surf, I came across this article Singapore’s Resilient Strategy by the Enterprise Resilience Management Blog by Stephen F. DeAngelis and Bradd C. Hayes. The central theme of the article is that Singapore adopts an resilient strategy to maintain its economic miracle, by importing foreign talent and positioning themselves such that they are relevant with the global scene. In this short commentary, I shall illustrate a few simple arguments that this resilient strategy is a double edged sword to the development of the entrepreneurial ecosystem.

To begin my commentary, let me first take out excerpts from the original article that will be of interest to the reader:

Being connected is a good thing for an actor because it means that casting directors haven’t stereotyped you into playing just certain kinds of roles — the broader your portfolio the more likely that you’re going to make a good living acting rather than waiting tables. Being able to act in a number of roles means that character actors are generally better connected than leading men. Connectivity is also a good thing when talking about the global economy. The Rod Steiger of Southeast Asia is Singapore. That nation has worked hard to achieve that position. Singapore understands that the more roles you are involved in the better your chances are of staying on top; therefore, it plays an important role in finance, electronics, trade, and (increasingly) biotechnology…..

In other words, Singapore isn’t lamenting that the world is changing and it might be losing jobs that might be going elsewhere; rather, it is actively trying to change its position in the future it sees emerging…..

Not only are companies being attracted to Singapore, world-class scientists are also making the move…..

The article pointed out that Singapore has been able to attract other luminaries as well by offering them generous salaries, great facilities, and full government support. The article notes that Singapore is taking a long view on its investment, but, even so, its efforts are apparently paying short-term dividends….

No one can doubt that Singapore’s economic miracle has become permanent. Its resilient strategy is positioning Singapore for an emerging future rather than trying to get the country to cling only to those sectors that made it successful in the past, like electronics and finance. It jump started its strategy by importing world-class scientists, building world-class facilities, and ensuring that its standards are as high as any around the globe. It’s a great lesson in resiliency.

In simplicity, the writer of the article pointed out why Singapore has created its own economic miracle, adopting the resilient strategy to change with the times. A long time ago, an Italian academic friend of mine spent a few years to work for two research institutes in Singapore. During one of the scientific meetings in the UK, we had a discussion about the biotech drive in Singapore. He made a comment that resonated with my thoughts at that time, which goes along the lines — I shall paraphrase it here –, “Singapore has a government who is obsessed with change. As long as it serves its economic agenda, it is willing to change its strategic direction and move towards new areas. Compare to European countries, they are fast and nimble while the European Union spend years trying to make changes and cannot get it done.” Here is a way to make it sound contradictory: Singapore’s is consistent in transforming and reinventing itself to suit the trends and movement of the global economy. Of course, the authors are also not aware that it is the Singapore government and not the Singaporeans who have decided upon this strategy.

To be fair, the authors have clearly identified Singapore’s strategy to survive in the global marketplace. After all, the Singapore resilient strategy is simple and the implementation can be summarized into three steps: (i) pick a new area of interest such as biomedical sciences, (ii) throw billions to hire world class foreign talent and build the infrastructure and (iii) pray hard that these world class foreign talent will take up citizenship or create technologies that will attract MNCs to its economy. Singapore Inc is like any big company like Google and Microsoft and for its growth, it just needs to acquire and conquer.

Of course, there is a price to be paid for this kind of strategy. That price came at the expense of having the small and medium enterprises that can hold the economy in times of recession. The weakness of the strategy is that in times of economic recession, Singaporeans cannot fend for themselves and subject to retraining and low wages. If we have a stable ecosystem comprising of small and medium entreprises, there will not be problems for the workers in that down cycle. The second problem is the free market argument backfires on the local populace towards the opening doors to foreign talent. The hiring of foreign talent is becoming a flashpoint between the government and its people because Singaporeans are constantly losing job opportunities to foreigners. Actually, opening doors to foreign talent helps to spur Singaporeans in facing competition and not being too inward-looking, but the problem is with the selling. The Singapore government has not found the correct sales pitch to make its people understand this rationale. Of course, as my colleague, KTM from Singapore Angle put it aptly in his article “On Foreign Talent, Immigration and Jobs”, having a Singapore middle-management with a win-lose mentality makes the problem worse.

It remains a challenge for the Singapore government to integrate this “resilient strategy” with the entrepreneurial strand that it is trying to cultivate in the Singapore populace [1]. Ultimately, if you are too successful, why bother to change? This is the dilemma in adopting such a strategy. Is the strategy successful? Yes, on the short term, but no doubt, the economy will always face this up and down economic cycles [2].

Related Articles:
[1] Finding the Golden Path: Can Singapore become a Silicon Valley, Innovation, World Scientific, August 2006, Vol6(3):62-63.
[2] Thoughts on PM’s Rally Speech 2006: Resurgence of Singapore Inc., SG Entrepreneurs.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Posterous
  • Tumblr
  • del.icio.us
  • LinkedIn
  • Mixx
  • Technorati
  • email

No related posts.


Comments

  • I agree with inspir3d's comments that the authors of the article "Singapore's Resilient Strategy" is focusing only on the economic facet of the issue.

    Yes, the initiatives to develop the life sciences' sector is aimed at making the next calculated bet on what investments will reap economic returns. But the social resilience of Singapore as a society and country is unravelling as more and more of our home-grown local talents are emigrating to Australia, Canada, US even Malaysia and China.

    So how resilient are we as a society and country to the unravelling of our national identity that Singapore is our home. For many of us Singaporeans who have grown up and developed within this little red dot, the burdens shouldered by NSmen are increasingly taken for granted through superfluous facilities as such SAFRA and pathetic tax reliefs. in return for the probability of getting injured, killed and 100% certainty of being inconvenienced so that we can protect the increasing 20% population that is non-Singaporeans.

    This is not Singapore my home, this is Singapore my hotel.

    I'm checking out soon.

    Majullah Singapura
  • interesting response.

    i wrote an email on Sunday to the authors to rebut their analysis.

    “I refer to your blog’s most recently published article, “Singapore’s Resilient Strategy”

    And while I find it an interesting point of view, as a Singaporean who was born, bred and grew up in the country, I feel your analysis is overly simplistic.

    You have failed to consider many important facts about the country’s economy, amongst many others:

    a. Since the year 2000, the incomes of the bottom third of wage earners have actually fallen. The push towards a knowledge driven economy has resulted in a neglect of those who were equipped with skills to thrive in one driven by manufacturing and industries such as electronics. This ‘resilient strategy’ you speak of may be a good one, but it’s execution has fallen far short of perfect. It has failed to deliver economic welfare to a large section of the population. And as any corporate strategist should know, execution is everything, especially the execution of a change management project.

    b. The country is now facing a very severe population problem. Last year, the country’s mothers gave birth to 36,000 babies, whereas it needs 50,000 to replace its population. This trend places a big question mark on the efficacy of this ‘resilient strategy’ when the country’s population is rapidly depleting itself. It also pays to take note that the same omniscient ruling party which has come up with this ‘resilient strategy’ is precisely the same party that placed penalties on families when they had their third child - it seems they are not so omniscient after all.

    c. Many life science students in Singapore, having gone through their life science degrees - supposedly egged along by the government to herald the ‘age of biology’ - are finding it difficult to find a job. If the strategy you suggest is indeed as resilient as it is, then how do you account for this phenomenon?

    There are many other intricacies and details about Singapore that you should consider, that would place a big question mark on your glowing analysis of Singapore’s Economy. In fact, a brief survey will demonstrate that making sweeping statements like

    “No one can doubt that Singapore’s economic miracle has become permanent.” and “It’s a great lesson in resiliency.”

    will place a huge question mark on the credibility of your analytical and consultancy skills.

    I suggest you research Singapore’s economy further, and reconsider the conclusions in your essay once again. “
blog comments powered by Disqus