Subject: RH: Why ForeignTalent policy cannot work
View this article only
Newsgroups: soc.culture.singapore
Date: 2003-05-31 13:24:17 PST
RH:
1. First, some disclaimers: my subject title is not some new
discovery -- it is now an accepted fact with the 'departures' of
several top honchos in the last 12 months (I left Singapore for the UK
in Jan so my local knowledge ended in Jan). The top honchos I
remember, although I did not pay much attention to this kind of news
then, include the top foreigners at DBS Bank, Chartered SemiConductor,
and probably a few more I don't remember. Which brings me to my
second disclaimer: I never do any research for my postings, trying to
make up for absence of research with greater invention and deeper
thinking -- and very carefully drawn conclusions. This laziness is
inexcusable but my defence is that generally, I only sketch out
outlines of arguments and readers who know more than I, which is
practically everybody here, would be able to find or remember even
more examples to rebut or reinforce my arguments. Having said that, I
plunge into another posting that may well be rebutted, to my
embarrassment. I await comments with some trepidation. Another note:
there are 3 kinds of foreign workers in Singapore. Together, they
number 1 million or 1 in 4 of us. The highest-paid and regarded are
the OFT or Overpaid Foreign Talent. Then there are the UFT or
Underpaid Foreign Talent. Finally, there are the Foreign Workers or
FW. Now, I can start my little hypothesis:
2. My few months in the UK have brought home to me one rueful fact:
Everything is very expensive here. And even more so in the US. And as
expensive in Europe and Japan. This across-the-board High Cost Living
is the central plank in my hypothesis and anyone who wants to rebut or
support it will take aim at it.
3. What does High Costs of Operation mean to companies here? And how
does that connect to OFTs in Singapore being unable to do what they
were headhunted to do?
4. OK. Let's take DBS Bank as one example. Since Lee Kuan Yew began
his mantra about how FTs are necessary for Singapore companies,
especially his GIC companies, the Board of DBS Bank began to reshuffle
its top management posts to create room for several FTs who would
prove that LKY is once again, a brilliant thinker who cannot be wrong,
so steeped in wisdom is he.
5. So, DBS, like Chartered SemiConductors, and many others more about
which we do not know about, hired headhunters to lure proven and
tested top honchos with proven successful track records. The offer,
like the always generous offers to foreigners (and always stingy
stipends to locals who have no clout with the PAP)included a 'Name
Your Price' kind of salary, 'Name Your Conditions' kind of contract
including Golden Parachutes if the deal did not work, and finally,
'Name Your Working Conditions' kind of contract that gave these OFTs a
very free hand to do anything they want. This last, because Talent
like these do not just switch jobs for money, they also want a free
hand to do what they think best.
6. Thus, these OFTs and there are at least a dozen of them, maybe
double or triple that number, had the best deals they could ask for.
Big money and the chance to shape or reshape their companies as they
see fit.
7. With a deal like that, especially the 'freedom to achieve' bit,
they simply could not refuse the deal nor fail. Yet, they failed. Some
had to jump, saved from humiliation by the Golden Parachutes. Others,
marking time, unable to achieve what LKY and the PAP and the GIC and
the GLCs and the whole country expected them to achieve. Why?
8. It is not for lack of Talent. This is never an issue. All these
men were headhunted and had proven track records.
9. The reason they failed and why the existing ones are not achieving
much and why future OFTs will also fail, is simply this: ASIAN
COMPANIES ARE NO-FRILLS OPERATIONS WHEREAS WESTERN COMPANIES HAVE LOTS
OF FAT.
10. Remember my statement about how everything here in the UK is very
expensive? That is the key. Now, in the UK or US or Europe, bank (or
other company) operations are very expensive, which is why everything
to the consumer is very expensive -- the costs simply have to be
passed on.
11. For example, take legal work costs to the bank. In most Singapore
or Asian companies, the legal work costs are very minimal because
contract laws are probably not as onerous (meaning not as
sophisticated). Also, lawyers are cheaper in Singapore and other Asian
countries. Also, most Asian companies merely engage a small law firm
on retainer to do any legal work they need, which, as we have seen, is
far less and less onerous than in the West.
12. In the West, the legal requirements are a lot more sophisticated
and expensive and companies maintain a large in-house legal department
of expensive lawyers as well as retaining outside law firms for more
specialised work. This all adds to huge costs.
13. This legal department example is just one example. There are other
departments that bloat up costs in Western, more sophisticated
companies that are either non-existent in Asian companies or are very
small operations in Asian companies. Another example, in Western
companies, there would almost surely be a sizeable Marketing
Department. In Asian companies, the salesmen would be doing what in
Western companies would be split into Marketing Dept and the Sales
Dept functions. Again, in many Western companies, there would even be
a HSE (Health, Safety & Environment) Dept, which would be non-existent
in Asian companies. There are many more I do not know about since I
have never worked in a big corporation. But I believe I have made my
point.
14. So when a OFT is lured from a big, reputable Western company to a
Singapore company, with the expectation and mandate to 'make that
Singapore company world-class, that is, Western, what can he do?
15. He fails. First, if he tries to graft all these Western high-cost
operations onto the Singapore company, he not only increases headcount
and payroll costs, he also has to create company structures that
ultimately are not needed!!! If they had been needed in the first
place, the company would already have them. So creating these new
depts and functions, while possible structurally and costs-wise, do
not add to the bottom line or even the efficiency of the company. So,
if he tries to reshape his DBS or Chartered Semiconductor or whatever
GLC into the kind of Western company operating environment he came
from, he will do more harm than good. So he fails.
16. Now, suppose the reverse happens. The Singapore company he is
lured to join is not doing well and he needs to cuts costs. He fails
again. Because, unlike the Western company, which is padded with much
fat, the Asian company is a no-frills operation. There is nothing to
cut. Any cut results in immediate reduction of operating efficiency
that will soon hit the bottom line -- here, he either gets out before
the bottom line exposes him or he hangs on and is eventually removed
when it is clear to all that he has done nothing good for the company.
17. Now, in the West, companies have so much fat that, like fat on the
body, accumulates with time so imperceptibly that no one notices, so
when the Western company is faltering, someone like the OFT can be
brought in and with ruthless cuts left and right, he can often restore
the bottom line and so gains fame as a miracle worker. Alas, even
miracle workers cannot work miracles on Singapore or Asian companies
(Japan is probably halfway between a Western and an Asian operation,
which may be interesting to speculate on whether a Japanese OFT may be
able to do what a Western OFT may fail to do).
18. Thus (I think I have given enough examples to illustrate my
argument), Lee Kuan Yew's Great Thought about how OFTs can create jobs
and wealth for the GLCs that hire them is sheer nonsense. This has
been proven by the failures and departures of so many.
19. Anyone challenging me can post rebuttals and I shall try to
explain further. Now, how about the UFTs?
20. These are talents and foreign but cheap. They are the ITs from
India and China that compete directly with our local ITs for jobs and
promotions. And because they can do almost the same jobs as our local
Singaporeans but cheaper, they get the jobs and thus depress the
salary levels of the profession they enter into in Singapore. The PAP
knows this. But they deliberately want to depress wages, which are
already the lowest among all the countries with comparable per capita
GDP, hoping that cheap labour will lure investors. They had only one
economic policy since 1965 and that is to lure investors. The only way
to lure investors is by being cheap. And since the PAP refuses to
reduce land costs, rent costs, statutory costs, etc, the only cost
they can easily reduce is wage costs. Thus, the UFTs.
21. Thus, the OFTs cannot create jobs and wealth, as claimed by LKY
and the UFTs steal jobs and depress wages for Singaporeans.
22. As for the FW, these are the labourers, construction workers and
maids. Singaporeans do not want to do what they do because there is no
minimum wage, as platformed by Dr Chee Soon Juan and his Singapore
Democratic Party in the last General Election. Since there is no
minimum wage, so the actual wages of these FWs are too low to attract
Singaporeans -- you cannot blame a Singaporean for refusing a job that
pays less than what he needs to pay for his transport, food,
utilities, etc, which is why FWs continue to be 'needed' for these
jobs in Singapore. If SDP's Minimum Wage solutions had been adopted,
much of the current unemployment of over 90,000 would have been
solved.
23. Thus, it is not a pretty picture. It is a grim discovery for
Singapore and Singaporeans to discover that OFTs, UFTs and FWs are all
stealing jobs and promotions and a meaningful life from Singaporeans.
All because one senile old man tried to impose his untested, untried
solutions on a Singapore that no longer had the right to challenge
him.
Robert Ho
31 May 03
UK 2124 S'pore 0424
Post a follow-up to this message
Message 2 in thread
From: Robert Ho (ho3@pacific.net.sg)
Subject: Re: RH: Why ForeignTalent policy cannot work
View this article only
Newsgroups: soc.culture.singapore
Date: 2003-06-03 05:29:05 PST
ho3@pacific.net.sg (Robert Ho) wrote in message news:
> RH:
>
> 1. First, some disclaimers: my subject title is not some new
> discovery -- it is now an accepted fact with the 'departures' of
> several top honchos in the last 12 months (I left Singapore for the UK
> in Jan so my local knowledge ended in Jan). The top honchos I
> remember, although I did not pay much attention to this kind of news
> then, include the top foreigners at DBS Bank, Chartered SemiConductor,
> and probably a few more I don't rememeber. Which brings me to my
> second disclaimer: I never do any research for my postings, trying to
> make up for absence of research with greater invention and deeper
> thinking -- and very carefully drawn conclusions. This laziness is
> inexcusable but my defence is that generally, I only sketch out
> outlines of arguments and readers who know more than I, which is
> practically everybody here, would be able to find or remember even
> more examples to rebut or reinforce my arguments. Having said that, I
> plunge into another posting that may well be rebutted, to my
> embarrassment. I await comments with some trepidation. Another note:
> there are 3 kinds of foreign workers in Singapore. Together, they
> number 1 million or 1 in 4 of us. The highest-paid and regarded are
> the OFT or Overpaid Foreign Talent. Then there are the UFT or
> Underpaid Foreign Talent. Finally, there are the Foreign Workers or
> FW. Now, I can start my little hypothesis:
>
> 2. My few months in the UK have brought home to me one rueful fact:
> Everything is very expensive here. And even more so in the US. And as
> expensive in Europe and Japan. This across-the-board High Cost Living
> is the central plank in my hypothesis and anyone who wants to rebut or
> support it will take aim at it.
>
> 3. What does High Costs of Operation mean to companies here? And how
> does that connect to OFTs in Singapore being unable to do what they
> were headhunted to do?
>
> 4. OK. Let's take DBS Bank as one example. Since Lee Kuan Yew began
> his mantra about how FTs are necessary for Singapore companies,
> especially his GIC companies, the Board of DBS Bank began to reshuffle
> its top management posts to create room for several FTs who would
> prove that LKY is once again, a brilliant thinker who cannot be wrong,
> so steeped in wisdom is he.
>
> 5. So, DBS, like Chartered SemiConductors, and many others more about
> which we do not know about, hired headhunters to lure proven and
> tested top honchos with proven successful track records. The offer,
> like the always generous offers to foreigners (and always stingy
> stipends to locals who have no clout with the PAP)included a 'Name
> Your Price' kind of salary, 'Name Your Conditions' kind of contract
> including Golden Parachutes if the deal did not work, and finally,
> 'Name Your Working Conditions' kind of contract that gave these OFTs a
> very free hand to do anything they want. This last, because Talent
> like these do not just switch jobs for money, they also want a free
> hand to do what they think best.
>
> 6. Thus, these OFTs and there are at least a dozen of them, maybe
> double or triple that number, had the best deals they could ask for.
> Big money and the chance to shape or reshape their companies as they
> see fit.
>
> 7. With a deal like that, especially the 'freedom to achieve' bit,
> they simply could not refuse the deal nor fail. Yet, they failed. Some
> had to jump, saved from humiliation by the Golden Parachutes. Others,
> marking time, unable to achieve what LKY and the PAP and the GIC and
> the GLCs and the whole country expected them to achieve. Why?
>
> 8. It is not for lack of Talent. This is never an issue. All these
> men were headhunted and had proven track records.
>
> 9. The reason they failed and why the existing ones are not achieving
> much and why future OFTs will also fail, is simply this: ASIAN
> COMPANIES ARE NO-FRILLS OPERATIONS WHEREAS WESTERN COMPANIES HAVE LOTS
> OF FAT.
>
> 10. Remember my statement about how everything here in the UK is very
> expensive? That is the key. Now, in the UK or US or Europe, bank (or
> other company) operations are very expensive, which is why everything
> to the consumer is very expensive -- the costs simply have to be
> passed on.
>
> 11. For example, take legal work costs to the bank. In most Singapore
> or Asian companies, the legal work costs are very minimal because
> contract laws are probably not as onerous (meaning not as
> sophisticated). Also, lawyers are cheaper in Singapore and other Asian
> countries. Also, most Asian companies merely engage a small law firm
> on retainer to do any legal work they need, which, as we have seen, is
> far less and less onerous than in the West.
>
> 12. In the West, the legal requirements are a lot more sophisticated
> and expensive and companies maintain a large in-house legal department
> of expensive lawyers as well as retaining outside law firms for more
> specialised work. This all adds to huge costs.
>
> 13. This legal department example is just one example. There are other
> departments that bloat up costs in Western, more sophisticated
> companies that are either non-existent in Asian companies or are very
> small operations in Asian companies. Another example, in Western
> companies, there would almost surely be a sizeable Marketing
> Department. In Asian companies, the salesmen would be doing what in
> Western companies would be split into Marketing Dept and the Sales
> Dept functions. Again, in many Western companies, there would even be
> a HSE (Health, Safety & Environment) Dept, which would be non-existent
> in Asian companies. There are many more I do not know about since I
> have never worked in a big corporation. But I believe I have made my
> point.
>
> 14. So when a OFT is lured from a big, reputable Western company to a
> Singapore company, with the expectation and mandate to 'make that
> Singapore company world-class, that is, Western, what can he do?
>
> 15. He fails. First, if he tries to graft all these Western high-cost
> operations onto the Singapore company, he not only increases headcount
> and payroll costs, he also has to create company structures that
> ultimately are not needed!!! If they had been needed in the first
> place, the company would already have them. So creating these new
> depts and functions, while possible structurally and costs-wise, do
> not add to the bottom line or even the efficiency of the company. So,
> if he tries to reshape his DBS or Chartered Semiconductor or whatever
> GLC into the kind of Western company operating environment he came
> from, he will do more harm than good. So he fails.
>
> 16. Now, suppose the reverse happens. The Singapore company he is
> lured to join is not doing well and he needs to cuts costs. He fails
> again. Because, unlike the Western company, which is padded with much
> fat, the Asian company is a no-frills operation. There is nothing to
> cut. Any cut results in immediate reduction of operating efficiency
> that will soon hit the bottom line -- here, he either gets out before
> the bottom line exposes him or he hangs on and is eventually removed
> when it is clear to all that he has done nothing good for the company.
>
> 17. Now, in the West, companies have so much fat that, like fat on the
> body, accumulates with time so imperceptibly that no one notices, so
> when the Western company is faltering, someone like the OFT can be
> brought in and with ruthless cuts left and right, he can often restore
> the bottom line and so gains fame as a miracle worker. Alas, even
> miracle workers cannot work miracles on Singapore or Asian companies
> (Japan is probably halfway between a Western and an Asian operation,
> which may be interesting to speculate on whether a Japanese OFT may be
> able to do what a Western OFT may fail to do).
>
> 18. Thus (I think I have given enough examples to illustrate my
> argument), Lee Kuan Yew's Great Thought about how OFTs can create jobs
> and wealth for the GLCs that hire them is sheer nonsense. This has
> been proven by the failures and departures of so many.
>
> 19. Anyone challenging me can post rebuttals and I shall try to
> explain further. Now, how about the UFTs?
>
> 20. These are talents and foreign but cheap. They are the ITs from
> India and China that compete directly with our local ITs for jobs and
> promotions. And because they can do almost the same jobs as our local
> Singaporeans but cheaper, they get the jobs and thus depress the
> salary levels of the profession they enter into in Singapore. The PAP
> knows this. But they deliberately want to depress wages, which are
> already the lowest among all the countries with comparable per capita
> GDP, hoping that cheap labour will lure investors. They had only one
> economic policy since 1965 and that is to lure investors. The only way
> to lure investors is by being cheap. And since the PAP refuses to
> reduce land costs, rent costs, statutory costs, etc, the only cost
> they can easily reduce is wage costs. Thus, the UFTs.
>
> 21. Thus, the OFTs cannot create jobs and wealth, as claimed by LKY
> and the UFTs steal jobs and depress wages for Singaporeans.
>
> 22. As for the FW, these are the labourers, construction workers and
> maids. Singaporeans do not want to do what they do because there is no
> minimum wage, as platformed by Dr Chee Soon Juan and his Singapore
> Democratic Party in the last General Election. Since there is no
> minimum wage, so the actual wages of these FWs are too low to attract
> Singaporeans -- you cannot blame a Singaporean for refusing a job that
> pays less than what he needs to pay for his transport, food,
> utilities, etc, which is why FWs continue to be 'needed' for these
> jobs in Singapore. If SDP's Minimum Wage solutions had been adopted,
> much of the current unemployment of over 90,000 would have been
> solved.
>
> 23. Thus, it is not a pretty picture. It is a grim discovery for
> Singapore and Singaporeans to discover that OFTs, UFTs and FWs are all
> stealing jobs and promotions and a meaningful life from Singaporeans.
> All because one senile old man tried to impose his untested, untried
> solutions on a Singapore that no longer had the right to challenge
> him.
>
> Robert Ho
> 31 May 03
> UK 2124 S'pore 0424
RH:
24. I would like to add the further observation that the UK is also
experiencing some of the same disappointing non-performance of US
OFTs. These US OFTs may have a 'proven' track record in the US but
when they come to the lower cost and less sophisticated UK companies,
they fail exactly like OFTs fail in Singapore, and for the same
reason. Currently, there is debate on whether these US OFTs Fat Cats
should be allowed to pay themselves so much for failing their UK
companies or doing nothing much except 'mark time' in their jobs. UK
may even legislate to prevent these US OFTs from paying themselves so
much for non-performance or even outright failures. Thus, this
phenomenon is present here in the UK as well. Generally, Japanese
companies do not give US OFTs so big a welcome because they know that
these US OFTs will not be able to do any magic for Japanese companies
because the corporate structures and practices are so different.
Similarly for European companies. Thus, language barriers seem to
prevent these US OFTs from cashing in on companies in Europe and
Japan. Or elsewhere in South America, Asia, Africa, etc. Therefore,
only the UK and Singapore remain suckers to US OFT fat-catting. This
is interesting because the UK and Singapore have something in common
-- both enjoy bending over forwards for the Americans. Both think
highly of Americans. Both worship Americans. Both have leaders who
think the world of Americans.
25. The question now may be asked -- why is it that these OFTs can
perform so well in US companies and yet fail so miserably and
indisputably in the UK and especially in Singapore? The reason is, IT
IS MUCH EASIER TO SUCCEED IN THE U.S. THAN ANYWHERE ELSE IN THE WORLD.
First, there is the scale of doing business. There are 280 million
Americans. If you have a business that just makes a dollar profit a
week from every American, you'd have a profit of $14.56 BILLIONS a
year. And Americans being Americans, it is easy to part them from
their money. In fact, the scale of business is much, much bigger than
just that $1 a week, for example, cars, houses, vacations, clothes,
etc. Thus, this scale of business creates giant companies with giant
operations that make billions and billions of annual profit, which
simply cannot be replicated anywhere else outside of the US. Thus fat
cat OFTs fail in the UK because the UK is 'only' 59 million people.
26. However, the UK does not suffer from this OFT phenomenon as badly
as Singapore, mostly because the UK has quite a lot of native talent,
who are often as good in the boardroom level management as US OFTs.
Singapore suffers badly because of another phenomenon -- Lee Kuan
Yew's calculated prostitution to the Americans. He has the country's
reserves to play with, with which to endear himself to Americans and
he does this in abundance. He deliberately buys Boeing planes more
than Airbus, even when the latter gives better deals and quality
planes. He buys American military weapons even when there are better
European alternatives. He hires US OFTs so that when these news are
reported in the American media, he is seen as a benefactor to American
companies, and word gets round that he is a good friend to Americans.
He even paid $1.8 million to Michael Porter basically for a speech and
some advice. He doesn't care whether the money gets anything for the
country -- all he cares is that word gets round in American circles
that he is very pro-America and pays well for American advice. Thus,
he prostitutes himself and the country's reserves to please Americans.
Hitting me is also a means to endear himself with the Americans
because he gets to talk regularly to the Americans on what he is doing
to me.
27. As further proof to what I have writtten, let me point out that
Chartered SemiConductors is third behind the world's largest contract
chip makers, Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co Ltd and United
Microelectronics Corp. Therefore, it would have made sense to lure a
Foreign Talent from these Taiwan companies instead of an AngMoh, since
the Taiwanese are Number 1 and 2 in that industry. But to LKY, Asians
are low-class. Only AngMohs are high class and Real Talents. So he
never thought of hiring Taiwanese FTs. He wanted an AngMoh and he got
AngMohs. Who then failed spectacularly until now, Chartered is
practically written off by stock pickers.
28. Thus, American business operating and business environments are
very, very different from Singapore's -- or even the UK's. Therefore,
what works in America usually doesn't work in Singapore and hiring
American experts do nothing for Singapore except waste money and
prevent original thinking and solutions. The only benefit from hiring
American OFTs is that Lee Kuan Yew gets to talk to them to impress
them on how up to date he is on the latest American fads and
practices, especially in management and economics theories. This makes
LKY a Big Sucker, which leads to my little joke that 'there is a Lee
Kuan Yew born every second'.
Robert Ho
3 Jun 03
UK 1329 S'pore 2029
Post a follow-up to this message
Message 3 in thread
From: Robert Ho (ho3@pacific.net.sg)
Subject: Re: RH: Why ForeignTalent policy cannot work
View this article only
Newsgroups: soc.culture.singapore
Date: 2003-06-05 04:46:35 PST
ho3@pacific.net.sg (Robert Ho) wrote in message news:
> ho3@pacific.net.sg (Robert Ho) wrote in message news:
> > RH:
> >
> > 1. First, some disclaimers: my subject title is not some new
> > discovery -- it is now an accepted fact with the 'departures' of
> > several top honchos in the last 12 months (I left Singapore for the UK
> > in Jan so my local knowledge ended in Jan). The top honchos I
> > remember, although I did not pay much attention to this kind of news
> > then, include the top foreigners at DBS Bank, Chartered SemiConductor,
> > and probably a few more I don't rememeber. Which brings me to my
> > second disclaimer: I never do any research for my postings, trying to
> > make up for absence of research with greater invention and deeper
> > thinking -- and very carefully drawn conclusions. This laziness is
> > inexcusable but my defence is that generally, I only sketch out
> > outlines of arguments and readers who know more than I, which is
> > practically everybody here, would be able to find or remember even
> > more examples to rebut or reinforce my arguments. Having said that, I
> > plunge into another posting that may well be rebutted, to my
> > embarrassment. I await comments with some trepidation. Another note:
> > there are 3 kinds of foreign workers in Singapore. Together, they
> > number 1 million or 1 in 4 of us. The highest-paid and regarded are
> > the OFT or Overpaid Foreign Talent. Then there are the UFT or
> > Underpaid Foreign Talent. Finally, there are the Foreign Workers or
> > FW. Now, I can start my little hypothesis:
> >
> > 2. My few months in the UK have brought home to me one rueful fact:
> > Everything is very expensive here. And even more so in the US. And as
> > expensive in Europe and Japan. This across-the-board High Cost Living
> > is the central plank in my hypothesis and anyone who wants to rebut or
> > support it will take aim at it.
> >
> > 3. What does High Costs of Operation mean to companies here? And how
> > does that connect to OFTs in Singapore being unable to do what they
> > were headhunted to do?
> >
> > 4. OK. Let's take DBS Bank as one example. Since Lee Kuan Yew began
> > his mantra about how FTs are necessary for Singapore companies,
> > especially his GIC companies, the Board of DBS Bank began to reshuffle
> > its top management posts to create room for several FTs who would
> > prove that LKY is once again, a brilliant thinker who cannot be wrong,
> > so steeped in wisdom is he.
> >
> > 5. So, DBS, like Chartered SemiConductors, and many others more about
> > which we do not know about, hired headhunters to lure proven and
> > tested top honchos with proven successful track records. The offer,
> > like the always generous offers to foreigners (and always stingy
> > stipends to locals who have no clout with the PAP)included a 'Name
> > Your Price' kind of salary, 'Name Your Conditions' kind of contract
> > including Golden Parachutes if the deal did not work, and finally,
> > 'Name Your Working Conditions' kind of contract that gave these OFTs a
> > very free hand to do anything they want. This last, because Talent
> > like these do not just switch jobs for money, they also want a free
> > hand to do what they think best.
> >
> > 6. Thus, these OFTs and there are at least a dozen of them, maybe
> > double or triple that number, had the best deals they could ask for.
> > Big money and the chance to shape or reshape their companies as they
> > see fit.
> >
> > 7. With a deal like that, especially the 'freedom to achieve' bit,
> > they simply could not refuse the deal nor fail. Yet, they failed. Some
> > had to jump, saved from humiliation by the Golden Parachutes. Others,
> > marking time, unable to achieve what LKY and the PAP and the GIC and
> > the GLCs and the whole country expected them to achieve. Why?
> >
> > 8. It is not for lack of Talent. This is never an issue. All these
> > men were headhunted and had proven track records.
> >
> > 9. The reason they failed and why the existing ones are not achieving
> > much and why future OFTs will also fail, is simply this: ASIAN
> > COMPANIES ARE NO-FRILLS OPERATIONS WHEREAS WESTERN COMPANIES HAVE LOTS
> > OF FAT.
> >
> > 10. Remember my statement about how everything here in the UK is very
> > expensive? That is the key. Now, in the UK or US or Europe, bank (or
> > other company) operations are very expensive, which is why everything
> > to the consumer is very expensive -- the costs simply have to be
> > passed on.
> >
> > 11. For example, take legal work costs to the bank. In most Singapore
> > or Asian companies, the legal work costs are very minimal because
> > contract laws are probably not as onerous (meaning not as
> > sophisticated). Also, lawyers are cheaper in Singapore and other Asian
> > countries. Also, most Asian companies merely engage a small law firm
> > on retainer to do any legal work they need, which, as we have seen, is
> > far less and less onerous than in the West.
> >
> > 12. In the West, the legal requirements are a lot more sophisticated
> > and expensive and companies maintain a large in-house legal department
> > of expensive lawyers as well as retaining outside law firms for more
> > specialised work. This all adds to huge costs.
> >
> > 13. This legal department example is just one example. There are other
> > departments that bloat up costs in Western, more sophisticated
> > companies that are either non-existent in Asian companies or are very
> > small operations in Asian companies. Another example, in Western
> > companies, there would almost surely be a sizeable Marketing
> > Department. In Asian companies, the salesmen would be doing what in
> > Western companies would be split into Marketing Dept and the Sales
> > Dept functions. Again, in many Western companies, there would even be
> > a HSE (Health, Safety & Environment) Dept, which would be non-existent
> > in Asian companies. There are many more I do not know about since I
> > have never worked in a big corporation. But I believe I have made my
> > point.
> >
> > 14. So when a OFT is lured from a big, reputable Western company to a
> > Singapore company, with the expectation and mandate to 'make that
> > Singapore company world-class, that is, Western, what can he do?
> >
> > 15. He fails. First, if he tries to graft all these Western high-cost
> > operations onto the Singapore company, he not only increases headcount
> > and payroll costs, he also has to create company structures that
> > ultimately are not needed!!! If they had been needed in the first
> > place, the company would already have them. So creating these new
> > depts and functions, while possible structurally and costs-wise, do
> > not add to the bottom line or even the efficiency of the company. So,
> > if he tries to reshape his DBS or Chartered Semiconductor or whatever
> > GLC into the kind of Western company operating environment he came
> > from, he will do more harm than good. So he fails.
> >
> > 16. Now, suppose the reverse happens. The Singapore company he is
> > lured to join is not doing well and he needs to cuts costs. He fails
> > again. Because, unlike the Western company, which is padded with much
> > fat, the Asian company is a no-frills operation. There is nothing to
> > cut. Any cut results in immediate reduction of operating efficiency
> > that will soon hit the bottom line -- here, he either gets out before
> > the bottom line exposes him or he hangs on and is eventually removed
> > when it is clear to all that he has done nothing good for the company.
> >
> > 17. Now, in the West, companies have so much fat that, like fat on the
> > body, accumulates with time so imperceptibly that no one notices, so
> > when the Western company is faltering, someone like the OFT can be
> > brought in and with ruthless cuts left and right, he can often restore
> > the bottom line and so gains fame as a miracle worker. Alas, even
> > miracle workers cannot work miracles on Singapore or Asian companies
> > (Japan is probably halfway between a Western and an Asian operation,
> > which may be interesting to speculate on whether a Japanese OFT may be
> > able to do what a Western OFT may fail to do).
> >
> > 18. Thus (I think I have given enough examples to illustrate my
> > argument), Lee Kuan Yew's Great Thought about how OFTs can create jobs
> > and wealth for the GLCs that hire them is sheer nonsense. This has
> > been proven by the failures and departures of so many.
> >
> > 19. Anyone challenging me can post rebuttals and I shall try to
> > explain further. Now, how about the UFTs?
> >
> > 20. These are talents and foreign but cheap. They are the ITs from
> > India and China that compete directly with our local ITs for jobs and
> > promotions. And because they can do almost the same jobs as our local
> > Singaporeans but cheaper, they get the jobs and thus depress the
> > salary levels of the profession they enter into in Singapore. The PAP
> > knows this. But they deliberately want to depress wages, which are
> > already the lowest among all the countries with comparable per capita
> > GDP, hoping that cheap labour will lure investors. They had only one
> > economic policy since 1965 and that is to lure investors. The only way
> > to lure investors is by being cheap. And since the PAP refuses to
> > reduce land costs, rent costs, statutory costs, etc, the only cost
> > they can easily reduce is wage costs. Thus, the UFTs.
> >
> > 21. Thus, the OFTs cannot create jobs and wealth, as claimed by LKY
> > and the UFTs steal jobs and depress wages for Singaporeans.
> >
> > 22. As for the FW, these are the labourers, construction workers and
> > maids. Singaporeans do not want to do what they do because there is no
> > minimum wage, as platformed by Dr Chee Soon Juan and his Singapore
> > Democratic Party in the last General Election. Since there is no
> > minimum wage, so the actual wages of these FWs are too low to attract
> > Singaporeans -- you cannot blame a Singaporean for refusing a job that
> > pays less than what he needs to pay for his transport, food,
> > utilities, etc, which is why FWs continue to be 'needed' for these
> > jobs in Singapore. If SDP's Minimum Wage solutions had been adopted,
> > much of the current unemployment of over 90,000 would have been
> > solved.
> >
> > 23. Thus, it is not a pretty picture. It is a grim discovery for
> > Singapore and Singaporeans to discover that OFTs, UFTs and FWs are all
> > stealing jobs and promotions and a meaningful life from Singaporeans.
> > All because one senile old man tried to impose his untested, untried
> > solutions on a Singapore that no longer had the right to challenge
> > him.
> >
> > Robert Ho
> > 31 May 03
> > UK 2124 S'pore 0424
>
> RH:
>
> 24. I would like to add the further observation that the UK is also
> experiencing some of the same disappointing non-performance of US
> OFTs. These US OFTs may have a 'proven' track record in the US but
> when they come to the lower cost and less sophisticated UK companies,
> they fail exactly like OFTs fail in Singapore, and for the same
> reason. Currently, there is debate on whether these US OFTs Fat Cats
> should be allowed to pay themselves so much for failing their UK
> companies or doing nothing much except 'mark time' in their jobs. UK
> may even legislate to prevent these US OFTs from paying themselves so
> much for non-performance or even outright failures. Thus, this
> phenomenon is present here in the UK as well. Generally, Japanese
> companies do not give US OFTs so big a welcome because they know that
> these US OFTs will not be able to do any magic for Japanese companies
> because the corporate structures and practices are so different.
> Similarly for European companies. Thus, language barriers seem to
> prevent these US OFTs from cashing in on companies in Europe and
> Japan. Or elsewhere in South America, Asia, Africa, etc. Therefore,
> only the UK and Singapore remain suckers to US OFT fat-catting. This
> is interesting because the UK and Singapore have something in common
> -- both enjoy bending over forwards for the Americans. Both think
> highly of Americans. Both worship Americans. Both have leaders who
> think the world of Americans.
>
> 25. The question now may be asked -- why is it that these OFTs can
> perform so well in US companies and yet fail so miserably and
> indisputably in the UK and especially in Singapore? The reason is, IT
> IS MUCH EASIER TO SUCCEED IN THE U.S. THAN ANYWHERE ELSE IN THE WORLD.
> First, there is the scale of doing business. There are 280 million
> Americans. If you have a business that just makes a dollar profit a
> week from every American, you'd have a profit of $14.56 BILLIONS a
> year. And Americans being Americans, it is easy to part them from
> their money. In fact, the scale of business is much, much bigger than
> just that $1 a week, for example, cars, houses, vacations, clothes,
> etc. Thus, this scale of business creates giant companies with giant
> operations that make billions and billions of annual profit, which
> simply cannot be replicated anywhere else outside of the US. Thus fat
> cat OFTs fail in the UK because the UK is 'only' 59 million people.
>
> 26. However, the UK does not suffer from this OFT phenomenon as badly
> as Singapore, mostly because the UK has quite a lot of native talent,
> who are often as good in the boardroom level management as US OFTs.
> Singapore suffers badly because of another phenomenon -- Lee Kuan
> Yew's calculated prostitution to the Americans. He has the country's
> reserves to play with, with which to endear himself to Americans and
> he does this in abundance. He deliberately buys Boeing planes more
> than Airbus, even when the latter gives better deals and quality
> planes. He buys American military weapons even when there are better
> European alternatives. He hires US OFTs so that when these news are
> reported in the American media, he is seen as a benefactor to American
> companies, and word gets round that he is a good friend to Americans.
> He even paid $1.8 million to Michael Porter basically for a speech and
> some advice. He doesn't care whether the money gets anything for the
> country -- all he cares is that word gets round in American circles
> that he is very pro-America and pays well for American advice. Thus,
> he prostitutes himself and the country's reserves to please Americans.
> Hitting me is also a means to endear himself with the Americans
> because he gets to talk regularly to the Americans on what he is doing
> to me.
>
> 27. As further proof to what I have writtten, let me point out that
> Chartered SemiConductors is third behind the world's largest contract
> chip makers, Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co Ltd and United
> Microelectronics Corp. Therefore, it would have made sense to lure a
> Foreign Talent from these Taiwan companies instead of an AngMoh, since
> the Taiwanese are Number 1 and 2 in that industry. But to LKY, Asians
> are low-class. Only AngMohs are high class and Real Talents. So he
> never thought of hiring Taiwanese FTs. He wanted an AngMoh and he got
> AngMohs. Who then failed spectacularly until now, Chartered is
> practically written off by stock pickers.
>
> 28. Thus, American business operating and business environments are
> very, very different from Singapore's -- or even the UK's. Therefore,
> what works in America usually doesn't work in Singapore and hiring
> American experts do nothing for Singapore except waste money and
> prevent original thinking and solutions. The only benefit from hiring
> American OFTs is that Lee Kuan Yew gets to talk to them to impress
> them on how up to date he is on the latest American fads and
> practices, especially in management and economics theories. This makes
> LKY a Big Sucker, which leads to my little joke that 'there is a Lee
> Kuan Yew born every second'.
>
> Robert Ho
> 3 Jun 03
> UK 1329 S'pore 2029
RH: If I may add another point, some American companies do do very
well outside of America. Some may think that this fact 'proves' that
American Talents are very good, that is, superior American business
acumen, superior American business management, superior American
business practices, etc. (And you cannot find a more eager believer in
American 'superiority' than Lee Kuan Yew, one of which is born every
second).
The truth is, all these American companies which do well outside
American ALL have their businesses succeed in America FIRST. As I have
pointed out, it is far easier to succeed in America than anywhere else
on earth because there are 280 million Americans who are easily parted
from their money. So, these American companies, in such an easy
business climate, grow big and therefore have the money to perfect
their business practices, from say, developing excellent french fries
fryers in MacDonalds, for example, to say, computer chips, etc. AFTER
having developed these superior products in America and making lots of
money in America, it is therefore easy to propagate these products and
practices elsewhere. So, we see American products and businesses
everywhere, not because they are inherently superior to locals but
because they developed these better products and services in easy
America first. There has never been an American company that say,
started first overseas elsewhere and then grew big worldwide. Thus,
all the global successes are honed and perfected in the easy business
climate of America and therefore has better chances of succeeding
elsewhere. For example, take Research & Development. If a Singapore
company started out to develop something for the home market, it could
only say, spend $1 per capita, so it spends $4 million on R&D. In the
UK, the same approach would result in 59 million and in the US, it
would be 280 million. So, which start up would have the better
product? Obviously the US start up of course. Thus the myth of
American business superiority and its OFTs are made this way and only
fools like Lee Kuan Yew think that it is able to reproduce such
business success in Singapore, or even Britain.
Robert Ho
5 Jun 03
UK 1247 S'pore 1947
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF8&th=52e3efd88d3db071&rnum=20