The best leaders are learners

One year ago, at a youth camp, a student who had been put in charge of his group confided in me that leading his team members wasn’t going as well as he had thought it would. “I’m just not cut out to be a leader,” he said, as he related to me what he thought a leader should have, which he didn’t: humour, confidence, wisdom and courage.

My reply to him, as one still understanding the ropes of what it truly means to lead was, “all these can be learnt, if you put your heart to it”.

It is said that there are approximately 50,000 books on leadership that are published annually – and this number may well be a conservative estimate – but if there is one indication that there is no final “destination” in this journey of becoming a leader, it is the countless number of resources that teach us how to better develop our awareness and management of ourselves and others.

Leadership is a relational endeavour; one cannot claim to be a leader without being able to inspire an action or a reaction in others. And because relationships are complex, one can only lead to the extent that he or she learns.

On the surface, it is painfully obvious that learning is imperative for any human enterprise – but I’d argue that in the long run, learning qualifies you to lead more than anything else (beyond promotions, positions, placement and power).

Here are three reasons why:

1 Learning equalises the years

How often have you heard the Chinese adage (often spoken by the elderly to the young), “I eat more salt than you eat rice”?

What is it about being “older” that makes one a wiser and better decision-maker? I’m convinced that the difference is not a matter of “years”, but a matter of “experience”.

We learn from our experiences, and our past outcomes that resulted in both positive and negative actions inform us as we negotiate between present choices.

But if experiences make us wiser, how do we attain more “experience”? Is “experience” purely a byproduct of the passing years, or can we, in the words of Sir Isaac Newton, see further into the future “by standing on the shoulders of giants”?

When we capitalise on the learnings and lessons of others and apply them in our lives, we are able to short-circuit the common bind of “years equals to experience” and accelerate our growth without wasting the time others have wasted.

Great leaders often ask themselves, “How can I avoid making the same mistakes, or how can I replicate others’ successes and take them further?”

2 Learning keeps you humble

Learning and humility feed off each other. On the other hand, the antithesis of humility, which is pride, has the sinister ability to deceive anyone into believing that he or she has “arrived”, that there is no need to adapt or change further, because he or she is superior and above reproach.

In contrast, great leaders are often the most humble people who are secure in themselves and do not see the need to put others down to elevate themselves.

John F. Kennedy once said “Leadership and learning are indispensable to each other”.

Interestingly, most US Presidents were avid readers who invested much of their time in learning, despite their busy schedules.

It is said that Theodore Roosevelt read two books a day, while Abraham Lincoln, who had only one year of formal education, attributed his successful political career to his habit of reading.

A strong learning posture allows you to see from different perspectives, live in the experiences of others, and most importantly, empathise with other points-of-view.

It is only when a person is an avid learner that he or she is continually challenged in his or her current views, and thus able to grow in convictions. It is only when a cup is empty, that it can be filled.

Maintaining humility allows us to be intellectually curious – and curiosity always precedes discovery and creativity.

3 Learning enables you to give

Somewhere during my college years, an epiphany occurred to me: How much can I learn and grow, if I were to dedicate all my transit and waiting moments to learning something new?

In my frustration of waiting and chasing for buses to get to college, I found a treasure chest.

I had realised that an average Kuala Lumpur/Klang Valley resident would spend approximately 10 to 15 hours per week travelling, either by inching through heavy traffic or waiting at bus stops and light rail transit (LRT) stations, and what a waste of time it would be if all that time was given to staring into space or letting one’s thoughts run idle.

I then made a concrete decision to listen to podcasts, audio books (when I would be driving) or to read (when I was waiting for the bus or LRT), in order to redeem that precious time.

I have since listened to over 700 hours of podcasts on topics related to public speaking, general knowledge, story-telling, leadership, faith and personal development.

My greatest learning moments are no longer in the classroom, but in my car, when I am alone and can learn something new.

During the course of the last two years, as a teacher in a high-needs school and a church leader, these moments of learning and reflection allowed me to pass on what I learnt to my students and congregation.

Those opportunities gave me great pleasure, as I was communicating to others what I had learnt and internalised for myself. I never felt “burnt out” because the stream of learning was always flowing.

Leadership may have many faces, but all leaders have the same outstretched hand of giving. And we can only give from what we have learnt. The good news is that leadership can be learnt – if we put our hearts to it.

Contributed by Abel Cheah

Abel Cheah is associate manager in the Talent Acquisition team at Teach For Malaysia. He believes that leadership is something that is nurtured and cultivated. If you are interested in listening to podcasts, he highly recommends Umano (an app that narrates articles). He believes that the best leaders are great lovers of learning. You can get in touch with him at editor@leaderonomics.com

Malaysia sacrifices talent to keep one race on top, said Lee Kuan Yew of Singapore

SINGAPORE - Straits Times Press, the book publishing unit of Singapore Press Holdings (SPH), announced in  Jul 29, 2013 the launch of Mr Lee Kuan Yew's new book

Malaysia is prepared to lose its talent through its race-based policies in order to maintain the dominance of one race, said Lee Kuan Yew in his new book which was launched August 6, 2013 in Singapore.


And although Malaysia has acknowledged the fact that they are losing these talents and is making an attempt to lure Malaysians back from overseas, such efforts may be too little too late, he said.

"This is putting the country at a disadvantage. It is voluntarily shrinking the talent pool needed to build the kind of society that makes use of talent from all races.

"They are prepared to lose that talent in order to maintain the dominance of one race," he said in the 400-page book called "One Man's View of the World" (pic).

It features conversations between Lee and his long-time admirer, Helmut Schmidt, former leader of West Germany. They discussed world affairs when Schmidt visited Singapore last year.

In the book, Lee pointed out that Malaysia is losing ground and  giving other countries a head start in the external competition.

About 400,000 of some one million Malaysians overseas are in Singapore, according to the World Bank.

When announcing the five-year plan for Malaysia, Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak said in Parliament in 2011, the government would set up a talent corporation to lure some 700,000 Malaysians working abroad back to the country.

But in his book, Lee said the demographic changes in Malaysia will lead to a further entrenchment of Malay privileges.

He noted that in the last 10 years, since the enactment of the New Economic Policy, the proportion of Malaysian Chinese and Indians of the total population has fallen dramatically.

"The Chinese made up 35.6 percent of the population in 1970. They were down to 24.6 percent at the last census in 2010. Over that same period, the Indian numbers fell from 10.8 percent to 7.3 percent," he said.

He added, "40 percent of our migrants are from Malaysia.

"Those with the means to do so leave for countries farther afield. In the early days, Taiwan was a popular destination among the Chinese-educated.

"In recent years, Malaysian Chinese and Indians have been settling in Europe, America and Australia. Some have done very well for themselves, such as Penny Wong, Australia’s current finance minister.

"Among those who have chosen to remain in Malaysia, some lack the means to leave and others are making a good living through business despite the discriminatory policies. Many in this latter class partner with Malays who have connections."

World Bank data for 2012 showed that the island republic has raced ahead of its neighbour, with gross domestic product per capita of US$51,709 compared with Malaysia’s US$10,381.

Najib had said Malaysia is set to become a high income developed nation as early as 2018, two years earlier than the targeted 2020.

Lee said in his book the separation of Singapore and Malaysia in 1965 marked "the end of a different vision in Malaysia on the race issue".

He added, "Much of what has been achieved in Singapore could have been replicated throughout Malaysia. Both countries would have been better off."

Sources: The Malaysian Insider

Related Stories:

Lee Kuan Yew's world views in new book:

We don't need your money: Lee Kuan Yew tells tycoons

M'sia willing to lose talent so that Malays can be dominant

Of fake meritocracy & endless quotas

S'pore can "dissolve into nothingness" - Kuan Yew warns

Related posts:

•  A question of talent in Malaysia 
• Singapore downplays its world's most expensive city

• US double standard on terrorism encourages slaughters

Education woes in Malaysia, etc, act now to address the weaknesses!

Policies have been formulated to improve and facilitate teaching and learning at all levels, yet there are weaknesses in the system that need to be urgently addressed.

THE dismal performance of our students in the Programme for International Student Assessment (Pisa) in 2013, where 51.8 % of our 15-year old students failed to reach even the baseline level for Reading, Mathematics and Science, has rightly alarmed many concerned Malaysian parents and educationists.

It bears repeating that the quality of an education system simply cannot exceed the quality of its teachers, no matter how many billions of ringgit is used in educational development plans or blueprints to improve our school system.

Prominent lawyer, politician, columnist and author Datuk Zaid Ibrahim, could well be expressing the sentiments felt by many informed Malaysians when he wrote in his book I, Too, Am Malay, that many teachers, are “poor in quality” and the school curriculum is irrelevant while administrators are too political.

The fact that 70% of our English teachers failed to make the grade in the Cambridge Placement Test speaks volumes of why and how we continue to witness a decline in English proficiency in our schools and universities over the years.

If it is true that a large number of our teachers are incompetent, then policy-makers will have to get the views of all the major stakeholders, accept sound suggestions from various quarters, before they attempt to tinker with our school system.

M. Bakri Musa, columnist and author in his book An Education System Worthy of Malaysia, mentioned the greatest weakness of all our educational reforms is the government’s exclusive dependence on in-house or Education Ministry officers, who have somehow failed to improve the quality of our education system over the years, in spite of all their grand schemes.

Let’s review how effective, practical or meaningful the educational reforms have been at school level.

Motivating students

When the co-curricular points system was first implemented in our schools, it seemed like a good way to motivate our students to participate more actively in sports clubs and societies to make them well-rounded students.

In the first place, the system was never implemented in good faith.

Students sitting for the Sijil Tinggi Persekolahan Malaysia (STPM) exams face a serious handicap when it comes to applying for admission to local universities for some degree courses compared to Matriculation students, who study for a shorter period of time and sit for their relatively easy internally-marked exam papers.

And as if things are not bad enough for STPM students, it looks like the co-curricular points system was designed to make university admission even easier for Matriculation students. The system enables them to secure high marks for co-curricular activities which account for 10% of the entry-score requirement for public university admission.

In matriculation colleges, students who participate in co-curricular activities among hostel block members are awarded marks meant for district level events, while students who compete in activities in college are awarded marks that are equivalent to state level grades. When students compete in inter-college events, they are accorded marks equivalent to that of national level!

Any wonder why so many SPM students choose not to do their Form Six?

The system is biased as it favours Matricu-lation students over STPM students. Moreover the chances of STPM students who score 4As getting courses of their choice at varsity level is also uncertain.

Considering the circumstances, many bright students simply don’t want to continue with Form Six.
Why experience the mental agony of getting 4As in the STPM exams only to be denied places for courses like medicine and pharmacy?

Let me reiterate that the STPM is a tougher exam and the co-curricular point system for matriculation students gives the latter an unfair advantage.

Research suggests that superior learning takes place when classroom experiences are enjoyable and relevant to students’ lives, interest and experiences.

As such, it is rather unfortunate that at a time when our education system is already failing to provide students with appropriate problem solving, critical and analytical skills and knowledge content, especially in Science and Mathematics, our policy-makers see it fit to make all students take up History (now made a compulsory subject to pass in the SPM exam).

Instead of learning world history and exposing our students to lessons we can learn from major historical events, much of our Form Four History textbooks are devoted to specific topics all in the name of promoting patriotism and national unity.

And why bother to introduce the SPM open certification exam in the first place when we have no real intention to offer our students real flexibility in their choice of subjects and electives based on their interests, abilities and aptitudes?

In his best seller, The World is Flat, Thomas L Friedman, points out that in today’s world, how children are educated may prove to be more important than how much they have to learn in school.

If what he says is true, why should we stifle our students’ initiative, curiosity and creativity by burdening them with uninspiring and even unnecessary subjects that have made school life such a dreadful and boring affair.

And yet, despite repeated calls to scrap Moral Education, such pleas have fallen on deaf ears. It has been pointed out that Moral Education, instead of exploring how we can effectively teach and test moral reasoning, only serves to indoctrinate our students and subjects them to mindless memorisation of core values.

To make things worse, our policy-makers decided that learning Moral Education was not good enough; in order to make our students more civic-conscious and patriotic, they went on to introduce yet another subject called “Civics and Citizenship” for our secondary school students from Form One in 2005.

Holistic development

Our national education philosophy emphasises holistic development of our students. That being the case, won’t Physical Education (PE) play an important role in producing physically fit and well-rounded students?

And yet with our students experiencing so much stress in their school life, they have to make do with just two periods for PE!

If that is not bad enough, some schools even use PE periods to teach “more important subjects” like Health Education. And what about our school-based assessment?

Various quarters have already pointed out that simply scrapping the Ujian Pencapaian Sekolah Rendah (UPSR) and Penilaian Menengah Rendah (PMR) exams to introduce the current school-based system may not necessarily serve to enhance learning and make school life more enjoyable for students.

When the school-based assessment system was introduced to schools in 2011, it was assumed that teachers would be able to assess their students’ abilities and potential.

But with so many “poor quality” teachers it will not be fair to assume that they are sufficiently equipped to evaluate their students based on internally-prepared assessments, that they take pains to assess their students properly, and that they are unbiased towards their students.

Well, that’s really a tall order. Already, we have heard stories from schools of incompetent and indifferent teachers teaching weak classes and yet awarding their students Band Six, no less, in their respective subjects!

And as usual, many schools are already resorting to buying workbooks in the market instead of getting their teachers to come up with their own worksheets and materials to assess their students, making a mockery of introducing the school-based assessment in the first place.

But we can’t blame the teachers, not when they are burdened with so much paperwork and keying data online into the SPPBS (Sistem Pengurusan Pentaksiran Berasaskan Sekolah).

It is worth noting that our current school-based assessment at the end of the day, is not much different to the A-B-C-D-E grade system or even the Percentage Score system. So why should teachers need to waste time with the banding exercise when in their daily dealings they can easily discern the band(s) the students actually deserve for the topics taught?

Wouldn’t it be better to reflect on their teaching approaches and enhance their professional knowledge, rather than waste time with paperwork and keying data?

It is about time to address the problems facing our education system.

For a start, the government should really grant greater autonomy to good schools in both urban and rural areas to adopt a broad-based curriculum, save for a few core subjects under the supervision of the Education Ministry, to let students learn what they ought to learn in today’s challenging world.

Get dynamic school principals to manage such schools and empower them to make decisions on matters related to school operations with the participation of parents and the local school communities.

If the principals are allowed to hire competent teaching staff, and be accountable for their performance, then we stand a better chance to improve our education system at the school level, specially when we are in a position to compare the performance of such autonomous schools with our national schools.

And with so many parents paying for tuition lessons these days, they would gladly pay school fees to get their children to study in such autonomous schools.

When such schools, gain a good reputation, the tuition syndrome will slowly die and more parents would choose to place their children in such schools rather than vernacular or international schools, resulting in a win-win situation!

With the current rot in the school system, the authorities should no longer be so protective over their turf. They must have the courage to admit the serious shortcomings of their policies and display greater commitment to think out of the box. It is now in the hands of the ministry to make it all happen.


 Contributed by Henry Soon - The Star/Asia News Network

The writer, a retired teacher, is still passionate about education. He hopes the Education Ministry will be bold enough to bring about changes for the greater good of students, teachers and parents.

Related posts:
1.  Technologies: A question of talent in Malaysia
2. Malaysia, US, UK and Australia lag in global education rankings as China and Asian countries rise to the top
3. Rightways Technologies: Asian students dominate global exam; Are the Chinese ...

Related article:
China students shrug off US education woes

A question of talent in Malaysia

In addition to drawing Malaysians home to work, we should equip, educate and train citizens so that they have equal opportunities to excel.

The success of Talent Corporation – a brilliant idea by the prime minister to lure Malaysians abroad to return home to live and work – has been quite impressive.

I am told that many talented Malaysians have answered the prime minister’s call to help transform the nation’s economy and I’d like to think that these Malaysians have returned not just because of the lower tax rate and other personal incentives (such as tax exemptions for two completely knocked down cars) but because they truly have something valuable to offer the country.

I do not for a moment think that these Malaysians returned because they found it tough to work abroad.

Instead, I think they have taken the opportunity under the Talent Corp programme to contribute their expertise and talent to Malaysia’s growth and development.

Although it has been successful since its inception in 2011, Talent Corp (and other organisations that provide incentives to lure Malaysians home) can only be a short-term solution at best.

The longer we rely on Talent Corp, the deeper the failings of our system will get and the more serious they will become. We will continue to be unable to provide the educational training necessary to produce a skilled workforce or to retain existing Malaysians.

There are many reasons why people emigrate and work elsewhere but most leave the country because they believe that their prospects in life will improve or because they no longer feel they belong – alienation and social injustice have driven them away.

Hence, while many millions have been spent on Talent Corp (and spent wisely), I urge the government to remain committed to building capacities within our country as well.

I am not thinking of spending millions of ringgit a la BR1M (people's aid) but of giving the nation the right dose of the good old work ethic.

Schools, besides exhibiting photographs of leaders, should be places where the right values can be inculcated.

The government, via the state apparatus available to it, needs to emphasise on a daily basis the importance of hard work and the inherent character-building effects of such an effort: for example, we’d certainly have enough television airtime for educational programmes if we were to dispense with some of the more sensational shows.

The effects on employment will be obvious. If we look objectively at why we need so many foreign workers, a large chunk of our workforce neither has the right work attitude nor does it feel sufficiently motivated to work hard.

It’s true that some employers take advantage of the presence of foreign workers to depress wages but it also quite clear to many employers that foreign workers work harder and smarter.

It’s not good policy to live with this situation and look for the easy way out (that is, to keep relying on and exploiting foreign labour) without putting serious effort into changing the values and attitudes of our own workforce.

In my experience there is hardly anyone who is incorrigibly bad and beyond help.

People want to better themselves but sometimes they need to be given a leg up. Everyone is capable of realising his or her true potential through nurture, patience and perseverance.

The attitudinal change we need in this country must come from our political leaders as well as employees and employers.

Malaysians are capable of many things and must never doubt this: the sacrifice we all need to make is to be patient, to endure the difficulties of training, and to help the less able and skilled to achieve their goals.

If an analogy is required, I shall say that leaders must learn to appreciate growing their own vegetables and rearing their own chickens. The satisfaction that comes from this is far more valuable than just depending solely on buying groceries from air-conditioned supermarkets.

This is where we must embrace the culture of meritocracy wholeheartedly.

In Malaysia today, meritocracy is a bogeyman, especially among Malays, who are terribly afraid of it without even knowing what it is, and we must discard the notion that meritocracy will have unintended discriminatory or negative effects on any given social group or ethnic community.

Let’s start by understanding what the word means, which is simply this: if we have ability and talent, then we should be rewarded.

We should not reward someone merely because he or she belongs to a certain class or has some inherited privileges.

The idea is simply to inspire and motivate all citizens through ability and sheer hard work. It also means that society and government have a grave responsibility to equip, educate and train citizens so that they have equal opportunities to excel and contribute to our nation.

Citizens can then propel themselves forward and build bigger and better things for the country, which in turn transforms our economy and society. It’s a liberating idea.

Women in our workforce, for example, are fully capable of taking on more demanding tasks at senior levels but we only hear of policies intending to provide them more access to top positions – little has happened to translate policy into action.

The prejudice against women bosses is still widespread and is based on a lack of appreciation for the positive contributions they make.

The skill sets that women bring to the table are largely ignored by men who are worried that their own positions will be threatened.

But as long as women are ignored at the top levels of decision making, the country will lose out on capturing the special talents and skills they possess.

There is also a great deal of prejudice in our society against gays and other minorities who, from my personal experience, are as diligent and capable of great achievements as anyone else.

I have friends who are world-class professionals and possess great ability and integrity who belong to these minorities, and yet we seem to love waging war against them for reasons I cannot comprehend.

If we put more emphasis on creating enemies among our own people, or putting up barriers to excellence because others “threaten” our own positions, then we will never produce the right attitudes or values.

The government must lead, inspire and motivate our workforce by example and through the effective implementation of policy. Malaysians deserve fair wages, adequate training and just rewards when they achieve their targets.

This is a long-term project, of course, but nothing worthwhile can be achieved if we lack perseverance.

As such, Malaysia continues to need Talent Corp but the local workforce needs respect and encouragement if the transformation of our country is to succeed sustainably.

 Contributed by  Zaid Ibrahim, The Star/ANN

Related posts:

1.  Financial talent crunch worsen
2.  Malaysia, US, UK and Australia lag in global education rankings as China and Asian countries rise to the top

Investing in 2014

Value Investing Summit 2014 - 'Live'

The end of the year is the time to reflect on the past and the beginning of the year is time to reflect on the future. 

SO how did your portfolio do last year?

The Dow Jones Industrial Average for US stocks hit 16,576 with a 26% gain for the year, the best year since 1996. By comparison, the Hang Seng Index performed 3%; Tokyo Nikkei did best at 57% and Bursa Malaysia ended 10.5% higher, just a tad off its record high.

On the other hand, the fastest growing economy in the world had the worst stock performance – the Shanghai A share index closed the year at -8%. Gold prices fell 27% to US$1,196 per oz, while property prices seemed to have done well in the United States and China. Bond prices are now extremely shaky, with the JPM Global Aggregate Bond Index falling by 2% during the year.

What is going on?

The answer has to be quantitative easing (QE) by the advanced country central banks. The world is still flush with liquidity and since investors are unclear on what direction to invest in, they have reversed investments in commodities (such as gold), avoided bonds because of prospective rises in interest rates and essentially piled into stocks.

Individual investors like you and I tend to forget that the market is really driven today by large institutional investors, including fast traders with computer-driven algorithms that have better information than the retail investor and can trade in and out faster and cheaper. It is not surprising that retail investors who have traditionally driven Asian markets have been moving more to the sidelines.

Even institutional investors are not equal. Long-term fund managers like pension funds and insurance companies are, by and large, highly regulated, with restrictions on what they can or cannot buy. So it is not surprising that the biggest money managers are today even larger than banks. BlackRock, the largest independent fund manager alone looks after nearly US$4 trillion, larger than most banks in emerging markets.

There are, of course, two types of asset management – active (where the managers actively invest according to their judgement on your behalf) and passive, where they simply follow the market indices or buy exchange traded funds (ETFs) that track market indices. According to the Towers-Perrin study of top 500 global asset managers, during the last decade, passive managers did better than the group as a whole.

So should we trust the market experts? I have been reading for years Byron Wien’s annual Predictions for Ten Surprises for the Year. Byron used to be a top investment pundit for Morgan Stanley but he is now working for Blackstone. His prediction of surprises is defined as events where average investor would assign one-third change of happening, but which he believed would have a better than 50% change of happening. He got roughly seven out of ten wrong in 2013, the more relevant mis-calls being the price of gold, a possible drop in S&P 500, the price of oil and the A share index.

Bill Gross, one of the top bond fund managers, pointed out that retail investors tend to be conservative, focusing largely on safe portfolios, such as investment grade and high yield bonds and stocks. But institutional investors have gravitated instead into alternative assets, hedge funds and more unconventional assets. Unfortunately, all these assets are “based on artificially low interest rates”. So if low interest rate policies are reversed, investors have to be prepared.

He rightly pointed out that the advanced country central banks are “basically telling investors that they have no alternative than to invest in riskier assets or to lever high-quality assets.” But if they withdraw QE or “taper”, then higher interest rates will cause a reversal of investment prices and also cause de-leveraging.

In other words, in order to bail out the world and keep the advanced economies afloat, their central banks are asking global investors to bear quite a lot of the risks of the downside. The smart money might be able to get out fast enough, but most retail investors do not have the skills to time their investments right.

So what should the retail investor do?

Peter Churchouse, who writes one of the best reports in Asia called Asia Hard Assets Report, quoted his son’s advice as “Buy good companies with strong earnings, strong growth and rock solid management. The world will go on.”

Quite right.

But how do we know which companies have rock solid management? My answer is: watch not what the annual report say (by all means read them), but look at what the management does. I have always tended to shy away from companies with high-profile CEOs who tend to win “Manager of the Year” awards.

There is, of course, no substitute for solid own research and look for yourself how the company or the economy that it operates in is doing.

The consumer or tourist is still the best investor because seeing for yourself gives you a feel of what is quite right or wrong with the country and just visiting the retail outlet, getting a sense of the service quality and the employee attitude would give you first hand what is right or wrong with the company you are investing in.

My favourite economy in Asia right now has to be Indonesia. I spent nearly 10 days over Christmas going through the markets of the most densely populated cities in Java and my conclusion was that Indonesia is on the move – literally. The population is young, mobile and connected. Every other shop seems to be selling mobile phones, cars or motorbikes. The quality of the retail shops, design and service has been improving over the years. And despite the coming elections, there is hope for change.

My bet, therefore, for 2014 is that if we stick to the better-run companies in the stronger economies, we should be better prepared for any tapering of QE to come.

Contributed by Tan Sri Andrew Sheng

Tan Sri Andrew Sheng is president of the Fung Global Institute.

MERITOCRACY is about more than just academic grades

MERITOCRACY in Singapore is about more than just academic grades, said Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong as he stressed that everyone here has a shot at success.

“When we say ‘merit’, we are not just talking about grades or scores, but also character, leadership and a broad range of talents,” said Lee said in a speech to more than 1,500 students and their parents at a bursary and Edusave award ceremony in his Teck Ghee ward.

He said: “We make sure that whatever your family background, whatever your circumstances, you may be poor, you may be from a single-parent family, you may be having some learning disabilities, but if you work hard, you can succeed.

“It does not matter what your background is. We make sure we identify you, we give you the opportunities and also the resources and the support so that if you succeed, you can do well for Singapore.”

Yesterday was the second time in just over a month that PM Lee stressed that meritocracy cannot be narrowly defined as being just about grades. He also spoke on the topic at a PAP conference on Dec 2 last year.

In that speech, the Prime Minister said he was worried when Singaporeans reject meritocracy and asked what could replace merit as the basis for decisions on jobs or school places.

The principle has come under considerable scrutiny in recent months, especially in the field of education.

While the Prime Minister repeated the same call on broadening the definition of meritocracy, yesterday he focused on what roles parents and students can play in it.

He urged parents to set an example: “Guide your children, set good examples and instil good moral values in them.”

Turning to students, Lee urged them not to neglect their studies even though there would be more focus on character, leadership and service.

“Results and grades are not the only measure of success or the only things that matter in life,” Lee said, adding: “It is important that you learn and study to give you a good foundation for what you can do in life.”

He pledged that the Governm­ent will continue to help all students achieve their potential. — The Straits Times / Asia News Network