Today, various media sources reported on that Former Commissioner Singapore Civil Defence Force (SCDF) Mr Peter Lim Sin Pang, and former Director of the Central Narcotics Bureau (CNB) Mr Ng Boon Gay are currently assisting the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau (CPIB) in its investigations into allegations of serious personal misconduct, with sources alluding that "money and women" were involved in the investigations.
It is CPIB's job to conduct investigations in order to maintain the highest form of integrity in the public services, as such, such investigations are not out of the ordinary. However, there are some things in this case that are worth noting:
a) News released on 2nd day of Lunar New Year
The timing of the Ministry of Home Affairs' (MHA) press release and confirmation is certainly worth taking note of, since it was done on a major public holiday. Why the need to confirm this news now when the investigations had already been in progress for about two to three weeks? Perhaps, it might be the government trying to send a strong message that such cases have zero tolerance. However, my view is that news of this investigation was leaked out to the media and the government had to hastily respond to the leak.
b) Uncanny timing - just after parliament debated on ministerial pay
It is rather uncanny that news of this case surfaced just a week after parliament debated on the issue of ministerial pay. The ruling party (PAP) has put forward its rationale that a good salary is needed to dissuade corruption among the government elite. News of the ongoing investigations is certainly going to shake the ruling party's prevailing argument and provide the opposition with a perceived upper hand on this issue.
c) Both are reported to be former Public Service Commission (PSC) Scholars
It is no secret that the Singapore Government prides itself in its Administrative Service elite where scholars are earmarked early in life for key positions in the government and government linked companies. Based on imperial China's philosophy of the selection of bureaucratic Mandarins, candidates are put through rigourous tests and observation sessions. Their career paths are carefully planned and progress keenly tracked . Observers will raised questions on whether the PSC needs to review its selection process.
People have started to speculate that where 'there is smoke, there will be fire'. Before anyone casts the first stone, let us try not to speculate on the results, for they are innocent until proven guilty.
Being a leader in today's world is no trifle matter. Even more so if you are in the public eye. I have been informed by a reliable source that one of the incumbent ministers is so busy with his portfolio that he has opted to give certain grassroots events a miss.
Damned if you do, damned if you don't.
On the topic of what we can do to sift out the best people for leadership, I have some thoughts to share:
i) Choose those who do not love money
A former business associate related to me that since the creation of the casinos, they have decided to run background checks on their current and potential customers to see if they are gambling addicts. Their concern is that their addiction to gambling will lead them to embezzle company funds, and an inability to pay their business partners.
Leaders are only as good as how they manage their weaknesses. However, if one has a natural love for money, we have a problem. Don't get me wrong - I am all for paying a man his worth in salt. However, there is a fundamental difference in choosing a job because it pays well versus choosing a certain job because it happens to pay well. The bigwigs at Enron and Tyco were paid obscene amounts of money - and look at what happened? They still embezzled, they still cheated.
Good leaders are those who do not love money.
ii) Test values, not aptitudes
One of things I have been pushing for, is the need to test for values and not aptitude. Aptitude tests like the MBTI, Big 5, DISC and so on, are good - but only to a certain extent. The onus is on the candidate to be honest. Additionally, choosing a 'correct' answer on the test does not show the tester why that answer was chosen. Testing of values is not an easy task. It takes time, resources an skillful assessors. And the biggest elephant in the room - it is hard to quantify it.
An example of testing values would be throwing a group of potential candidates into an unplanned and perhaps mentally strenuous activity that seeks to throw them off guard, thereby exposing each candidates strengths and weaknesses. My personal favourite options might be sending candidates on kayaking or mountain hiking trip that will allow the assessors to discover the candidates' true colours.
Another method is to make candidates feel completely at ease during say, a cocktail session. A friend of mine deliberately cozies up to candidates and throws at them a few drinks before slipping them certain questions to test their views. They are surrounded by numerous assessors (very sober ones) who keenly observe the candidates' body language and responses. You might be surprised at how easy it is to set someone's tongue loose with a couple of martinis.
iii) Past achievements does not equate to future success
This current world we live in is obsessed with the need to quantify everything that cannot be quantified - purely because of accountability and marketing issues. As such, a person's past track record is regarded as the best predictor of future success. To some extent, this can be true. But what I advocate is finding out if one has failed before and how this person has overcome that failure. I am sometimes rather apprehensive when faced with a candidate that has a perfect track record. Life is never linear. If life has been good to you so far, and if you faced your first failure while working for me, wouldn't I be collateral damage? That would be a risky proposition indeed. However, if you have faced challenges in life, been trampled upon and despised, but against all odds you were able to make good, I will certainly take a closer look at this person. Alas, it will be tough for organizations to accept such people, for the Human Resources manager has to be held answerable to the higher ups on such a decision. In our risk averse society, charity has no place when your job is on the line.
The answers are easy, but the execution is cumbersome. Organizations whose leaders have the guts and gumption to make a concerted effort to find the best leaders, will find them.
image from smexcellence.com.au
