Leaders: Born or Made?

image from http://gunningforthetruth.wordpress.com

Recently, founding father of Singapore, Lee Kuan Yew, was asked by a group of Japanese officials and businessmen about his views on leadership. He relates his experience with sheepdogs in Australia and how they are chosen based on certain traits that they are born with. To get a good sheepdog, one needs to find the 'right dog'.

This view is not uncommon. In the 1940s to the 1950s, management gurus proposed the idea that leaders were born and not made. This view is known as the Trait Theory of Leadership. Most of us in this day and age have probably heard others mention that leaders can be 'made'. This might fall under the Behavioural Theory of Leadership. What this means is that researchers study the successful habits of leaders, past and present, compile them into bite sizes and then pass on the knowledge to those keen on being a good leader. This theory proposes that with observation and practice, anyone can become a good leader.

If one believes in Trait Theory, then there will be no need for trainers and academics helping people to be better leaders. Instead, psychologists and behavioural scientists would create a host of tests to help affirm that you have good leadership genes. This does not bode well for business schools and leadership consultants, does it?

If one believes in the Behavioural Theory, then the reverse is true. Business schools and leadership consultants will do very well, not psychologists and behavioural scientists.

I do believe that despite motivation and proper training, some catch on rather quickly, while others find it hard to put into practice. The question is this --- why then do some find it easier to learn while others struggle at the application stage? Why are some better leaders than others? Why are some better employees than others?

In the latest HRM magazine (Issue 116), page 10 attracted my attention. The title was 'Grooming average Joes'. The magazine interviewed 3 senior managers on how a leader should bring out the potential in an employee displaying average performance. 2 out of the 3 believed that 'no employee is average'.

Let me weigh in on this.

If 'no employee is average', then why do we have some staff who are more efficient and others who are 'simply useless'? The general argument is that the 'useless employees' are not fulfilling their potential, thus the dip in their performance. The solution? Leaders should, in the words of one of the senior managers, 'Marshall and Motivate'.

But my question is this --- assuming all things being equal, what if a person's maximum potential is a 5/10, and his colleague's is 8/10? I propose that this is not far fetched. Instead, unpopular as it may be, this is reality. Very simply, I believe that some people make better leaders and better employees than others. One might think that I am stating the obvious, but if you believe that there are 'no average employees', what you are saying is that with enough motivation, everyone has an equal chance of being promoted and becoming a good leader.

Believing that there are 'no employees are average' may also lead to unrealistic expectations. If you do not recognise that different employees have different levels of potential, you are likely to unfairly blame an employee should he or she not meet your expectations. On the flip side, the employee might unfairly blame the leader for not doing enough to unveil his or her potential.

When a colleague is observed to be consistently delivering sub-par work, one should ask whether the colleague has already achieved his or her potential in the presence of motivation and support. If the answer is a firm 'Yes', then you will have to decide whether your organization should continue keeping this person. However, if the colleague has shown sparks of good work and added value occasionally, but is inconsistent, then we can probably say that his or her potential has not been achieved.

We are all born different, talented in a variety of ways. Politically correct as it may be, it would be a terrible thing to assume that we are all mold-able to a desired end.

Paul Lim is an adjunct faculty member with the Organisational Behaviour & Human Resources (OBHR) discipline at the Lee Kong Chian School of Business, Singapore Management University; an Academic Associate and an Adjunct Associate with the Centre of Innovation & Enterprise, Republic Polytechnic, Singapore. He teaches courses in Leadership, Organisational Behaviour and Cross Generational Management. A doctoral student with French business school - Grenoble Ecole de Management, he is currently writing his dissertation on the impact of mentoring on employee retention in millennials (Generation Y).

Maid's body found in HDB water tank --- looking beyond the tragedy

SINGAPORE - Housing Board flat dwellers of Black 686B Woodlands Drive woke up to some rather unique water quality on the morning of 16 May 2011. Residents claimed that the water coming out of their taps looked 'slightly yellowish and appeared unnaturally foamy'. At least four complaints were made to the respective town council about the issue. Efficiently, the water supply was subsequently turned off at 11am and 'maintenance work' was done to rectify the problem.

However, for the residents of Block 686B, their day would soon turn their stomachs upside down.

Police received a call at about 10am from a maintenance crew, informing them about a dead body floating in the 2m deep water tank. The woman, identified as a domestic worker who worked for the family on the sixth floor of the same block, was clad in bermudas and a T-shirt. Some cuts were suggested to have been observed on her back.

A resident, when interviewed in the wake of the grisly discovery, commented this way,"This so disgusting. My whole family finished a big pot of green bean soup I cooked this morning."

This incident is certain to be the talk of the town in the coming days as more information about this case is revealed. However, two issues have to be addressed as a result of this tragic episode.


Terrorism: Poisoning the water supply
This incident certainly raises questions about the safety of water supply to the more than 85% of Singaporeans who live in HDB flats. Maintenance workers who maintain the cleanliness and serviceability of HDB facilities belong to private contractors hired by the respective town councils. A substantial number of these workers hail from South Asian countries and have been observed to be industrious in their work. However, geopolitical considerations need to be taken into account as South Asia is not unknown to be sympathetic to radical elements. A scenario whereby a maintenance crew member deliberately adds poison to the water tanks of a cluster of flats under his care is something not unimaginable. I am glad that certain security agencies in our country proactively embed individuals into certain sites to test the potential damage that could be carried out by radicals. It is in recent memory that Singaporeans recall the breach of a MRT train depot by a couple of graffiti artists. This breach raised pertinent questions about the security infrastructure and systems at MRT depots and improvements have been made since. In light of this recent abuse of a public facility, it is important for the HDB and the Ministry of Home Affairs to review current security clearance measures when hiring these workers.


Crisis Communication
At 12.30pm, residents received town council notices informing them about the 'maintenance works' that was in progress. Such notices are typically pasted at lift landings on the ground floor.

When interviewed by the local media about the lack of information and communication efforts made to affected residents, general manager of the affected town council, Mr Soon Min Sin, responded,"Our priority was to protect the residents and cut off the water supply for their safety...once the investigation is concluded, we will let the residents know."


Crisis communication is vital for many reasons:

1. To minimize the spread of inaccurate information and speculation

2. To avoid a situation of panic that may result in irrational decisions made by members of the public eg. When the Japanese radiation leak from Fukushima was said to be heading towards China, members of the public started hording salt in the hope of countering radiation sickness and to hedge against the rise of future salt prices.

3. To instil confidence in the public that the situation is under control


There are areas in Mr Soon's statement that could be further clarified.

1. If cutting off the water supply is for 'their (the residents') safety', are we to imply that residents whom might have earlier consumed the tainted water are in an 'unsafe' position? If so, what can be done to make your position 'safe'?

2. It is prudent to omit certain details (for the moment) that are deemed as 'too sensitive'. However, a dearth of information gives members of the public a perception that authorities in charge of the situation are hiding something, or worse, clueless as to how to approach the situation

3. Timeliness of releasing information is an important point to note. If residents are to only be given access to information 'once the investigation is concluded' --- which might mean a few months, it is not unexpected that uncertainty will sweep over residents. Affected residents might trawl the internet to fill the information void. This could lead to the spreading of misinformation about the case, the town council managers or in a worse case scenario --- the involved government agencies.

Yesterday's story was a tragic case of a person losing her life in a foreign country. From this tragedy, the various reactions of the affected residents are highly valid. At times though, it could be bizarrely seen as comical, especially in the absence of information communicated to them by the relevant authorities.

Of greater importance is the future safety of the water supply at HDB flats. The irony of this case might end up as such: the untimely death of a domestic helper will help rectify security lapses, resulting in the saving of more than 4 million Singapore residents' lives.

Sources: Straits Times, US State Department

Paul Lim is an adjunct faculty member with the Organisational Behaviour & Human Resources (OBHR) discipline at the Lee Kong Chian School of Business, Singapore Management University; an Academic Associate and an Adjunct Associate with the Centre of Innovation & Enterprise, Republic Polytechnic, Singapore. He teaches courses in Leadership, Organisational Behaviour and Cross Generational Management. A doctoral student with French business school - Grenoble Ecole de Management, he is currently writing his dissertation on the effects of peer mentoring on employee retention in the millennial generation (Gen Y). This article is based on the writer's personal opinion and is not representative of any organisation or persons he may be associated with.

Why the 'Cooling-off Day' might backfire on the PAP

image from http://sgsharemarket.com/home/2011/04/nomination-day-is-on-april-27/

SINGAPORE - This year's Singapore General Elections will see a new campaigning rule being put in place. A 'Cooling-off Day' will come into effect 24 hours before polling day, creating a 'campaign silence period' where no campaigning activities will be allowed for all parties.

The rules are further detailed on the Singapore Elections Department website:

Cooling-off Day The eve of Polling Day is designated as Cooling-off Day, a day when election campaigning is prohibited. This 24-hour campaign silence period is to give voters some time to reflect rationally on issues raised during the election before going to the polls. There are some exceptions to the prohibition of campaign activities on Cooling-off Day:

• Party political broadcasts on television;
• Reports in the newspapers, on radio and television relating to election matters;
• Approved posters and banners that were already up, and lawful Internet advertising that was already published before the eve of Polling Day;
• Books previously scheduled for publication;
• The transmission of personal political views by individuals to other individuals, on a non-commercial basis, using the Internet, telephone or electronic means; and
• Such activities or circumstances as may be prescribed by the Minister.

The above exception list, other than party political broadcast, also applies to Polling Day.
(http://www.elections.gov.sg/elections_parliamentary.html)

Prime Minster Lee Hsien Loong gave the reasons for this new ruling:

Mr Lee said: “I think 24 hours after the last excitement of the election campaign period, the rallies, the door-to-door campaigning, the adrenaline flowing, the clash in the mass media as well as in person, perambulating vans blaring away loud speakers, it’s good to have 24 hours to just calm down, think about it – tomorrow we vote.”

He added that having a cooling-off period will also lessen the risk of public disorder.

“Previously, once in a while, we have had pushing and shoving at election rallies as the crowd gets worked up and doesn’t disperse, but the main thing is to have time for people to think over the issues and to vote in a calm state of mind,” he said.

Mr Lee was asked how this additional 24-hour cooling-off period would apply to the online world of networking and video-sharing sites.

“On the Internet, it’s grey and also the policing is not so straight-forward but even then, in principle we should say today is a quiet day. I cannot control several million videos on youtube but your website, what you’re putting up in your own name, I think that should end the day before the cooling-off day,” he said.

Countries that have imposed a similar period of campaign silence include Australia and Indonesia.

Australia has a three-day black-out of election advertising and Indonesia has a three-day cooling-off before Legislative Elections and a two-day cooling-off before the Presidential election.

(http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporelocalnews/view/1021648/1/.html)


In my previous post, I remarked that such an act would be akin to clutching at straws, a last ditch effort to help the ruling party 'win back' some voters who might have been perceived as emotionally swayed at the highly charged rallies organised by the PAP's counterparts in the opposition.

The theory goes something like this --- on the eve of polling day, you attend a highly charged rally organised by an opposition party. It is the day before the General Elections. The candidates are fired up and they want to set you alive with the their closing statements. You return home all pumped up, go to bed and awake the next morning (probably still pumped up) to vote in favour of the opposition.

At the first rally held by the WP in 2011, it was estimated that up to 20,000 people attended the event held at Hougang. My take is that the open fields have already reached its maximum capacity, and any change in attendees would be negligible.

Assuming that 5 separate rallies held by the different opposition parties were to take place on the final day of campaigning, it is estimated that a maximum of 100,000 people will be reached with speeches that are non-aligned with that of the ruling party's.

These rallies are taped by the respective parties and then uploaded onto their organisation websites or youtube, usually on the following day for public viewing.

However, by imposing a Cooling-off Day in order potentially win back these 100,000 rally participants, the PAP might inadvertently be giving the opposition the upper hand.

Rallies are only allowed to be be held up to 2200hrs (10pm). Subsequently, the parties might take some time to edit what was taped and then upload the footage either later that night or on the following day. Final day rallies are vital as candidates deliver their most crucial arguments and seek to end on a high note.

Given the new Cooling-off Day ruling, it is certain that all parties will scramble to upload their latest video footage as soon as possible in order to meet the deadline (this does not apply to personal blogs, personal facebook or twitter accounts). Doing so would give the public one full day to view what took place at the previous night's rally.

Now, if the Cooling-off Day ruling was not imposed, rallies and campaigning would have gone right up to the wire --- 10pm on a Friday. Parties would also rush to put their rally footage on the internet. The public would then only be able to view the recorded footage, but only on polling day itself. However, given that voters are eager to cast their vote and that many would like to beat the queue on polling day, many would want to cast their votes early, resulting in many not being able to review all of the previous night's events and speeches. Thus, the reach and the potential impact of the most recently uploaded rally videos would be relatively limited. Such a situation would favour parties who are able to organise highly charged rallies and send their 100,000 rally attendants to vote on a 'high' in just less than 24hrs post rally.

Perhaps, this was what the ruling party saw coming, leading them to impose a Cooling-off Day.

However, by imposing a Cooling-off Day, the public would be able to get a full day to view all of the previous evening's footage by all the different parties. Popular and relevant speeches (identified by passionate supporters of the opposition parties) would be 'pushed' or forwarded to friends via facebook, twitter and email. Voters will be hungry for last minute bits of information, trawling the internet and keeping their Facebook news feeds current. It would thus be very likely that exponentially more than the 100,000 rally participants would be eyeballing the videos --- videos that are likely to be 'pushed' by passionate supporters of the opposition parties. Instead of 'stabilising' the minds of the 100,000 rally participants, the Cooling-off Day may just do the opposite and expand the videos' reach to more people, convincing them to align with the opposition parties instead.

The Cooling-off Day might have worked in the absence of social media. PM Lee was also asked to comment on the impact of the internet on the Cooling-off Day (see above) and he acknowledged that it is something hard to police.

It is unknown if such a proposed angle was considered before the rule was imposed. That said, only time will tell if a strategically crafted move would turn out to be critically successful or a tactical failure.


Paul Lim is an adjunct faculty member with the Organisational Behaviour & Human Resources (OBHR) discipline at the Lee Kong Chian School of Business, Singapore Management University; an Academic Associate and an Adjunct Associate with the Centre of Innovation & Enterprise, Republic Polytechnic, Singapore. He teaches courses in Leadership, Organisational Behaviour and Cross Generational Management at the above institutions. A doctoral student with French business school - Grenoble Ecole de Management, he is currently writing his dissertation on the effects of peer mentoring on employee retention in the millennial generation (Gen Y). This article is based on the writer's personal opinion and is not representative of any organisation or persons he may be associated with.

Singapore goes to the polls...and my view?

picture from facebook Singapore General Election 2011's Notes

Ah, I guess this post had to come sooner or later, and some of you might also like to know where I stand on things.

Many of you probably have an idea of who you are going to vote for or if I could phrase it in another way --- vote against.

The ruling party, People's Action Party (PAP), has been in power since 1959 (the PAP I am referring to is the one in Singapore, not the ones in Ghana, PNG, Romania or Vietnam). That, I must say, is a very long time.

So, am I pro-PAP or pro-opposition?

Not so fast, people. You see, this is a very difficult question to answer.

I am grateful to the PAP for how they have brought Singapore to where we are currently in the areas of religious harmony, physical infrastructure, safety and defence. In education, despite all the discontentment with the system, we have a largely literate and educated population. In the area of public housing, it is not a perfect system, but when you compare with global cities of similar standing, we are probably one of the best in the world. Trust me, I have seen first hand, public housing projects the world over.

Personal taxes are low and are going to be even lower come 2012. We have no natural water source and so we drink recycled water --- but it is safe and we can drink in confidence knowing that we have a constant supply of drinkable water (can't say so much of the smell of late...smelled of fish the last time I bathed).

We often take our public transport system for granted. Highly efficient and clean, getting connected to all parts of the island is rather seamless, although things can get rather crowded during the rush hours. But really, have you been to Guangzhou, Shanghai or Tokyo? You will know the horrors one faces when attempting to take the trains --- read as 'be prepared to get squashed, molested, etc'.

We have access to all kinds of foods in the world at our doorstep at relatively affordable prices. Some of you do not know this --- but the government stockpiles 3 to 4 times the rice that every supplier sells to the retailers in secret warehouses all over the island. This keeps the price of certain staples low and also acts as a buffer in times of crisis.

Being paranoid at every kind of crisis that might hit Singapore, the government has pretty much done scenario planning for all kinds of eventualities, save a nation wide alien abduction...where, I might just stand corrected.

But like every government the world over, the ruling party is not perfect.

A United Nations Development Programme report of developed countries ranked Singapore second, just behind Hong Kong in income inequality (http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporelocalnews/view/1110326/1/.html). This presents an extremely challenging picture to those who are at the very bottom of the income spectrum, which in turn affects those who are the most innocent of the lot --- the children of low income families.

Political freedom is controlled in this country. The media is censored in the interest of national security. Political rivals deemed a 'threat to harmony' in the past have been dealt with effectively such that you would either be poor or have to be self-exiled. If you study Hofstede's research into Individualism vs Collectivism, Singaporeans have always been preached to about the greater good for the rest of society --- thus, we are collectivist as a result of the government. Fear of Singapore running into anarchy is a sufficient enough reason for baby boomers who have vivid recollections of Singapore during the times of racial riots.

Cars are a luxury item in Singapore. The price of a Toyota Altis in Singapore will get you the equivalent of a couple of brand new beemers on a 27 month lease in the US. Which reminds me, that we have to pay multiple types of tolls for use of roads in order to alleviate congestion. We pay tolls not to recoup the cost of building the roads. We pay tolls so that we can attain the right to use the roads. The amounts are relatively small in themselves, but when accumulated over time, it can get rather costly (think US$10 for a daily trip to and from the office during the rush hour period).

The price of housing has risen rather ridiculously in tandem with inflation, buyer demand and worsening land scarcity. While this phenomenon is not new to other cities in the world, the price of public housing in Singapore is pegged to land prices as determined by market forces --- not a good thing for couples who want to start a life together. As such, marriages are delayed in lieu of sufficient funds to put for a down payment for their first home. Systemic problems are created as a result of this trend --- relationships between couples are strained as a result of the pressure to speed up the putting of the down payment and might lead to a called off wedding; couples would get married later and lead to couples having difficulty in conceiving, which leads to an overall expected Total Fertility Rate (TFR) of 1.11 in 2011 (CIA world fact book). This puts us at 3rd from the bottom of 223 countries with Hong Kong and Macau being worse off than us.

Which leads me to the next issue: foreign immigrants.

As a result of such a low TFR, foreign immigrants are needed to replace the shortfall in babies. However, rumblings from the ground show that citizens are highly dissatisfied with the influx of foreigners who allegedly 'raise the price of our flats, threaten our jobs, stress out our children with their fantastic grades and steal our husbands'. Of course, it is not all that bleak and I have good friends of all nationalities. Heck --- I have even helped them settle into Singapore! But these feelings of resentment are not trivial and it will be a major issue during these elections.

Hmm...

To make things more dicey for the ruling party, thousands of Gen Y voters will be voting for the first time. They do not care for proven track record and your experience (that's actually part of my doctoral research). They want good answers to their questions and have no qualms about voting for the opposition in the spirit of 'trying something new'. They are definitely not politically apathetic and do care a lot for what happens to themselves and the society at large.

Another weak area of the ruling party --- clear, transparent communication. In the past, the mainstream media could be censored. Not the internet though...ok, so with the exception of a few token 'banned sites' such as Playboy. With the internet, it is terribly difficult to censor blogs, tweets and your facebook status. I appreciate the many good policies that the PAP has implemented, but by having a history of clamming up or limiting the debate on tough issues, it has done itself a disfavour by not providing people with clear, transparent communication --- leading to suspicion and misunderstood perceptions.

And so, where do I stand?

The PAP has done a great job in the past. Will it be relevant in the future? A balanced government also needs the presence of good quality opposing voices in order to keep the ruling powers in check. This is good for the people, but it can also be a hindrance to the decision making turnaround time --- something the PAP has been used to as it is a very powerful competitive advantage for Singapore in such a fast moving world.

I am certain that the PAP's top brass know that these elections will be a humbling one for them. In what I see as a desperate attempt to clutch at straws, a cooling off day has been imposed on the day before the elections, where no political party is allowed to campaign. This is to give people time to think things over carefully before making their vote on polling day --- to be read as 'please don't be swayed by the good quality of candidates in the opposition, look at our track record and continue to vote for us'.

Will I vote in favour of a certain party? I am afraid that is not my main concern. Parties have both good and bad candidates. I will vote for the candidates whom I think will best serve my area's needs. It may be the PAP or it may be the opposition. But I will have to make a concerted effort to find out, process and decide.

For you out there, the Singaporean, you need to vote. Get out there and make a decision. You could choose the PAP, the opposition or spoil your vote. But that is your choice and you need to contribute to the future of our nation, so please vote wisely.

And yeah, these opinions are purely my own and do not reflect that of any organization or persons that I am associated with *wink*

Entering the new year 2011

What a year it has been.

Despite the ups and downs, I am glad that we are here, now.

As for me, insights into the land of China greeted me even before the advent of 2011. And unlike many of my friends, I actually have come to embrace China in a rather unexpected way. I am well aware of the presence of China's hardware and its software that is going through a 'Work-in-Progress'. But instead of rejecting them, why not do the opposite?

You see, as economies develop, so does the software in the people. It will take some time before the Chinese are exposed to the ways of western civilization. But in the meantime, perhaps it would do us well not to think of ourselves as superior folks. That said, certain anecdotes are rather amusing. For instance, watching this documentary on how an American entrepreneur started a gym in Beijing, he related that some ladies did not know what to do with the treadmill and started to walk on it --- in their heels.

A funny thing happened while I was walking with a good friend of mine, down a busy street in Shanghai. Unlike Tokyo's Kabuki-Cho area which is first, a red-light district, attracting tourists to its sights, this was not a sleazy place but a street where tourists frequent for shopping.

I quipped that he needed a woman in his life. As if on cue, a lady pimp approached my friend and touted the services of 'pretty maidens who would be at his beck and call'.

The timing was so uncanny, I threw back my head and laughed!

We met 2 more male pimps on the way before my friend decided to put away the temptations of the world and be tempted by another kind --- food!

We sat down in a cafe (try not to think of Starbucks...try wooden stools and marbled top tables that well aged in a musty shop) and on that cold winter's night in Shanghai, we had a piping hot bowl of Soy bean milk coupled with Fried dough fritters (豆浆油条). A separate bamboo basket of meat dumplings topped it off.

China - love it or loathe it, you will be impacted by it in some way or another.

Do not enter...you may be crucified?

Hmm...don't quite know what to make out of this sign I saw in Florence, Italy.

A real blessing...

To be able to spend time away from the daily grind of work and take time to enjoy a respite with family is certainly one of the greatest blessings one can have in this time starved world we live in.

Well, 3 weeks into our family's extended break, I certainly am feeling blessed, cherishing the opportunity to have this (probably) once in a life time chance to spend so much quality time with family in beautiful locations.

We spent sometime on the west coast of California and I will be heading over to France next week for the school orientation workshops. That will be followed by a quick pop into Bologna and then back to Los Angeles before we make a stop in Tokyo en route to Singapore.

California is really different than the eastern part of the US where I was more familiar with. I shan't go into the details, lest I create a cyberspace war between those living on Eastern standard time and Pacific standard time, *grin*, but regardless of the number of times I return to this country, I am forever perplexed by its numerous anomalies.

For example, the United States remains the leading superpower in the world. This is regardless of China's rise. Geopolitically, militarily and economically, the US continues to hold strong clout over the world. Yet, many of its citizens do not have basic health care insurance. That means a visit to the doctor to confirm that you have a fever would set you back US$80, without medicine. (In Singapore, a visit to the doctor with medicine dispensed to you would set you back about $20 to $30 for the same ailment). And with the recent push for better health care, the majority of the American people are not looking forward to changes put in place to help get affordable health care. Perhaps it's the fear of change; perhaps it's because the peoples' huge mistrust in their President (Americans have an in-built mistrust for government). But sentiment is such that the people would rather fight against change and remain in the status quo. Someone once told me, "Perception is reality".

How true.

I recently asked my class whether they would rate the US as a conservative or liberal country. Not one of them rated the US as a conservative country. The reason? They cite Hollywood; high profile divorces and scandals; and the ability to own guns. Yet, the US remains relatively more conservative than most European countries, and perhaps, even some Asian countries. This is attributed to a strong Christian base in the country --- giving way to many politicians playing the religion card to sway voters. Recently, Katy Perry's performance with Elmo on Sesame Street was removed from TV because she was wearing an inappropriate piece of clothing --- a gold bustier.

Have you recently seen what clothes Barbie is wearing?

I am utterly confused.

As the US promotes its tenet in the right to freedom of speech and religion, you have the recent case of the inter faith religious centre uproar (it's actually not a mosque, folks). CBS recently asked one of its producers to dress up in the hijab (tudung) and the burqa (covers all of the body except the eyes) and walk in public at 3 locations --- New York City, Houston (Texas) and a suburb in New York state. The result was that the cosmopolitan areas did not even bat an eyelid. The same cannot be same for locations that are more homogeneous in ethnicity.

Another area that the US promotes aggressively is their fundamental belief in gender equality and equal opportunity. I recently had a chat with a knowledgeable person about the presidency of the US. We also talked about equal opportunity in the US. This person was basically saying that it would not be possible in the foreseeable future for the US to have a female Head of State, due to the old boys club. New Zealand, Germany, Finland, the UK and even Indonesia have shown the way in this aspect. The US?

We all know about the financial challenge facing households in the US. However, I also found out that fresh produce can be gotten for a fraction of what you pay in many countries, including Singapore! I could get a can of soup, 8 heads of corn, slippers, t-shirts and underwear for US$ 99cents each. A bag of about 20 to 30 oranges costs US$5. Compare that to the same price per orange in Tokyo! And yet, according to USA Today newspaper, almost a quarter of Americans are living below the poverty line (calculated as an annual household income of less than US$22,000 for a family of five). Of course, the household savings rate is hovering around 3%, up from 2+% in the boom years before the recession. It is so affordable to have a decent standard of living in this country. Yet, many are impoverished.

Well, this post is not a complaint, it is simply an observation of this country. Talk to The Wife --- she will simply wave her hand at me and run off to the Factory Outlet Malls.