|
|
 |
| Reflections
on a legacy of breakthroughs |
| |
 |
| Mr Teo Ming
Kian, first chairman of TEC (March 2000
– March 2005) |
|
| |
The overwhelming response to The Enterprise
Challenge (TEC) is proof that innovative ideas
abound in Singapore. As a fact, TEC has attracted
over 900 project proposals since it was set up
in 2000.
Challenge catches up with the man behind
TEC, Mr Teo Ming Kian, who stepped down as chairman
in March 2005. (Dr Tan Kim Siew, Permanent Secretary
[Defence Development] is the current chairman
of TEC.)
In an email interview, Mr Teo, who is
presently Chairman of the Economic Development
Board, reflects on TEC’s successes and shares
his thoughts on innovation.
(Click on the questions to see answers)
It is a good feeling to see so
many innovative and breakthrough
ideas coming from Singaporeans and
foreigners based in Singapore, from
the public sector as well as the
private sector. It is yet another
vindication that Singaporeans are
innovative and the Singapore environment
can be supportive of innovation.
Far more satisfying is the changed
mindset and culture in the public
sector that is ready to accept untested,
unproven ideas for trial and experimentation. |
To me, this mindset and culture
in the Public Service that is not
just open to, but supportive of
new, untested ideas is critical
for Singapore. The world is undergoing
accelerated technological advances
and globalisation. It means change,
rapid change. If we are not able
to respond to the changes that bring
with them great challenges and exciting
opportunities, we could be relegated
to irrelevance.
Enterprises and entrepreneurs will
have to constantly develop new products
or services and new business models
to compete with the ever-increasing
number of contenders from increasingly
extended reaches of the world. Similarly,
the Government has to not only constantly
adapt our policies to support these
private sector efforts, but find
new ways of doing things better
and more effectively, so that as
a total environment, innovation
and enterprise can thrive. We have
to make Singapore a place where
not only “things work”,
but where “new things could
have a chance to work”.
We have been distinguishing ourselves
by doing things effectively and
efficiently. Many people commended
Singapore as a place where things
work. Visitors can get out of the
airport with their bags in 20 minutes.
Goods that others might have to
take a chance on in other countries
are sure to be delivered in or through
Singapore. That means we have no
margin for error, zero defect, first
time right. It contradicts the type
of environment needed for new ideas.
There will bound to be failures
for new untested ideas.
The challenge is therefore how to
manage such a contradiction. We
want an environment and culture
of zero defect, first time right,
great efficiency, within time schedule
and budget for established products
and services, whilst at the same
time, an openness welcoming of
new ideas to be tested and experimented
where we know there could be failures.
TEC was therefore conceived as the
platform (not really a fund) that
enables innovators from the Public
Service and private sector who think
they have great ideas that could
provide quantum leap improvement
to the Public Service, knowing very
well that things may not go according
to what they envisage. It is also
a platform where the piloting agencies
could try out the ideas knowing
well that they could fail and not
be taken to task. It is a mechanism
to “by-pass” normal
hierarchy to encourage a vibrant
environment for anyone to surface
unsolicited innovative ideas and
have them tested, instead of just
preferring to go for safe and proven
solutions.
Whilst TEC, as a public sector platform,
could only justify support for ideas
that could bring about quantum leap
improvement to public service, the
spirit and mindset that encourage
the Public Service to be more innovative
and enterprising in the affairs
of government will go a long way
to build a more innovative Singapore.
I think the culture and spirit of
welcoming innovation in the Public
Service is taking root and the private
sector is recognising it. Since
TEC first started five years ago,
over 900 proposals have been submitted,
30% of these from the Public Service
and the rest from the private sector,
covering almost the entire diverse
range of government services. About
65 of these proposals have been
accepted for trial.
It did not start that way, of course.
I can still remember when TEC was
first conceived, my colleagues were
a little apprehensive as they found
it hard to imagine what ideas, or
for that matter if there would be
any that would come through TEC.
We had to arm-twist public agencies
to be trial agencies. But now I
am more than satisfied. |
We learned along the way, adjusted
and refined things as we went along.
This was the philosophy we adopted
from the outset. Hence, if you look
at how TEC has evolved, there have
been several changes since we first
started. And I am sure there will
continue to be
new changes.
It is not a matter of whether we
had done the wrong thing and therefore
would have done them differently
with perfect hindsight. While we
should look for lessons to learn,
as we had told the innovators and
piloting agencies that even if the
trials did not have the desired
results, we would have learned many
lessons, at least how not to do
the same thing again, we should
not be too caught up with worrying
how it would look from hindsight,
or we would never get started.
We know we cannot have a perfect
system from the start. What we did
was therefore to start with version
0, and introduce new improved versions
along the way. I think that is the
mindset we should have for new ideas.
We will wait forever if we were
to wait for the perfect one. |
I am very thankful to the private
sector participants. They are very
busy people. There is great opportunity
cost for them to sit with us at
the sessions, sometimes late into
the evening. Not just the time when
we were listening to the presentations,
but the time taken to pore through
the thick folders before the presentations.
Also how at times they had to adjust
their travelling schedules just
to be present at the sessions. They
were serious to a fault in discharging
their duties, all these efforts
without any compensation or honorarium.
I think they found the idea and
concept of TEC exciting. Some foreign
members told me they found our Government
amazing and very different from
those they know. I think if we show
sincerity and willingness to engage
the private sector and are willing
to take their comments and act on
them, they will participate wholeheartedly
and provide all their help.
What I find most valuable from the
private sector representatives was
their way of thinking. They possess
the rigour and a good rein on how
we define public good. Unless the
economics make sense, how one stretches
the definition of public good would
still be futile if the idea is not
sustainable. The rigour and discipline
in evaluation are critical to how
we value and assess the proposals. |
| I think TEC offered a good glimpse
of how the Public Service works.
It demonstrated that we are prepared
to be open to new ideas and are
ready to test and experiment with
those we think hold the potential
for substantial improvement to public
service. It showed that we are on
the constant lookout for improvement
and are serious about building an
environment to do so. |
| I am not sure if TEC should continue
forever. It is the spirit of TEC
that should be perpetuated. It would
be the day when that spirit could
thrive within the Public Service
without any platform like TEC. |
| Yes, I asked to step down from
the chairmanship. It is an interesting
and exciting appointment. TEC has
never been boring. The ideas are
fresh and surprising. The panel
members I had shared the enthusiasm,
and I could go on forever. Others
should be given the chance to participate.
But more importantly, we need fresh
minds to constantly rejuvenate the
movement. Renewal and rejuvenation
are necessary to ensure the spirit
of TEC is kept alive. |
| I don’t think I am more
innovative than any other person.
I have always argued against the
stereotyping of Singaporeans as
non-creative or innovative. I have
seen some interesting ideas coming
from even young students. To me,
an environment supportive of innovation
and enterprise is crucial. |
Many felt that unless we are poor
and hungry, we cannot be innovative
or enterprising. Some felt that
an orderly and disciplined environment
will stifle innovation. I disagree.
Silicon Valley is not poor or hungry.
It is one of the richest areas in
the US. Yet, many innovations and
new enterprises originate from there.
Many great innovators are not poor
or hungry. Yet, they went on to
discover new things and businesses.
Microsoft, Intel, CISCO are examples.
Companies like 3M adopt a disciplined
approach to innovation.
To me, it is the recognition that
change is upon us and necessary,
the commitment to try out and experiment
with ideas of potential, tolerate
the failures and reward handsomely
the successes. If we demonstrate
that we are serious about building
up this environment, that there
are champions for innovation and
enterprise, more innovators, born
or nurtured will emerge. I see TEC
serving this role.
It is a platform where anyone could
say: “There is this big problem/opportunity....
There is this radical solution....
Why not try it? There is the risk
that it may fail.... But imagine
the success!” |
|
|
| |
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
| "Whilst
TEC, as a public sector platform,
could only justify support for
ideas that could bring about quantum
leap improvement to public service,
the spirit and mindset that encourage
the Public Service to be more
innovative and enterprising in
the affairs of government will
go a long way to build a more
innovative Singapore." --
Mr Teo |
|
|
| |
|
ABOUT
TEC
To date, TEC has generated 917 proposals.
Sixty-five innovative projects have
received a total of $19 million for
trial testing. Forty-one have been trial-tested
and most are at different stages of
implementation in the Public Service.
The TEC projects impact diverse areas
of public service such as national development,
education, healthcare, security, environment,
social welfare and the arts. To learn
about TEC and innovation projects, visit
www.tec.gov.sg. |
|
|
| |
"I
am not sure if TEC should continue forever.
It is the spirit of TEC that should
be perpetuated. It would be the day
when that spirit could thrive within
the Public Service without any platform
like TEC." --
Mr Teo |
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
