A brief discussion of three takeaways from the late Lee Kwan Yew\u2019s efforts to transform Singapore into the global powerhouse it has become.<\/em><\/p>\n
Lee Kwan Yew, the first Prime Minister of Singapore, who held power for over 30 years, died on Monday, 23 March 2015, at the age of 91. In addition to the international recognition and accolades typically expected for a longstanding statesman, Lee is unanimously credited as the founding father of modern day Singapore: taking a backward and fractured Third World country in the late 1950s, and implementing an extensive series of policies, some of which might be considered draconian, but transforming the country into one of the most developed and wealthiest in Asia.<\/p>\n
It is in that regard that many countries, such as China, are reportedly using the model Lee implemented as the blueprint for their own economic transformation (Source: CNN<\/a>). In the Caribbean \u2013 from Jamaica in the north, to Trinidad and Tobago in the South \u2013 Singapore is frequently held as a model that individual countries should emulate. Singapore, like many countries in the region, has few if any natural resources, but it has still been able to achieve the economy that is globally recognised and respected.<\/p>\n
In today\u2019s world, many countries worldwide, including some in the Caribbean, have prepared a long-term national plan, which typically cover a period of 15\u201420 years. Interestingly, very few businesses maintain such a plan, granted the coverage period might be considerably shorter, such as between five and 10 years.<\/p>\n
Though it is essential for businesses and even countries to have a long-term plan, emphasis and due attention is critical in its execution. In many instances, and for businesses and government alike, plans are frequently implemented through a series of discrete projects and activities, which although important constituents in the plan and strategy, can leave the overall outcomes disjointed and not truly fulfilling the initial vision.<\/p>\n
A better approach would be to see the plan as a system in which all of the elements are connected and interconnected \u2013 to varying degrees. Hence although Singapore under Lee would have placed considerable attention on the big issues, such as education, healthcare and economic reform, he also addressed subjects like population control and country aesthetics. Though those last two topics might have seemed inconsequential in the grand scheme of what was being accomplished, in hindsight especially, they are now being recognised as important contributors to the success that has been realised.<\/p>\n
Far too often, and from a country perspective, but it is also seen in the private sector space, governments focus on \u201cquick wins\u201d \u2013 activities that are relatively easy to execute and can be labelled a \u201csuccess\u201d when completed. These quick wins, though important and point to some measure of achievement, can be at odds with the long-term planning and efforts needed to realise more lasting and comprehensive change.<\/p>\n
The transformation of Singapore, from where it was in the 1950s to what it is now, was a 30-year process. It was not achieved overnight, and neither did it primarily comprise quick wins. Instead, there were numerous slow and hard-won battles not just to roll-out a series of initiatives, but to change the attitudes and culture of that society. In both the country and business contexts, such transformations are never quick, and they are never easy.<\/p>\n
Though suggested in the previous point, it is still crucial to emphasise: in order to truly transform an organisation or a society, unpopular decisions will be necessary. Most Caribbean countries have experienced situations in which, arguably, the most uncomfortable decision, but perhaps the one that offered the best chance for lasting improvement was avoided, as it might have been politically unpalatable to do otherwise. Similarly, many organisations can be inclined to take the path of least resistance. Decisions that might be drastic and unpopular, but if implemented early could circumvent worse situations later, are avoided. However, when this approach is employed, frequently both countries and organisations are left exposed, and then find themselves in crisis management mode, when the unpleasant consequences have come to fruition.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
In summary, the approach Lee Kwan Yew implemented in Singapore is not for the faint of heart. Though he is widely recognised as the \u201cfather of modern day Singapore\u201d, he was also heavily criticised for the measures he implemented. However, he believed in the vision he had for his country, the path he was forging, and was willing to pay the price for the success ultimately realised.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Image credit:\u00a0 Erwin Soo<\/a> (Wikimedia Commons)<\/em><\/p>\n
__________<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"